585
586
587

CultureOn the Myth of a Western Rape Culture. (self.TheRedPill)

submitted by southLDNlad

Recently, I have been told that I perpetuate a Rape Culture, because I refuse to bend backwards and kowtow to the leftwing ideology that paints men as so intellectually inferior to women, that we need them to tell us what consent is. It is purported that men are utterly incapable of differentiation when it comes to rape and consentual sex.

If a women does not wish to have sex with you there are a vast number of instances when she will tell you this. Upon your first introduction. Upon further conversation. During the first date. On the journey back to her flat. Whilst the clothes come off. And finally, at any point during sex.

And yes, I am aware consent can be revoked during sex. However, consent CANNOT be revoked in retrospect. This is another myth that some women push in order to increase their own threat level, and therefore their hierarchical position in the relationship.

Pakistan has a rape culture. Rwanda has a rape culture. Saudia Arabia has a rape culture.

The West does not have a rape culture. Yes, there are rapists. But it is not socially acceptable. Therefore, it is not a rape culture. We know rape is wrong, because of the western values we were brought up on, that cherish women and instil the concept of "Chivalry" (Yes I am aware that the modern concept differs vastly from the true meaning of chivalry) in our children. A true rape culture would encourage or promote the idea that women are chattel and therefore do not have a right to consent. This is found within any Muslim State that enforces the teachings of the Koran. There is your rape culture.

Do you go to jail for stealing? Yes. Then there isn't a theft culture. Do you go to jail for rape? Yes. Then there isn't a rape culture because it isn't socially acceptable.

And yet, because it is politically incorrect to criticize Islam, the left will not acknowledge this. No, instead they will attack college aged white males, because that suits their agenda.

If you are genuinely worried about rape cultures, look at countries in the Middle East and Africa where rape is socially acceptable, and try to do something to help them.


[–]Senior Endorsed ContributorCopperFox3c 201 points202 points  (25 children)

This is a little off-topic to TRP, so I'll help you out and make it more on topic:

The way to control people is to control the dominant Cultural Narrative. In the same vein, the way individual women manipulate men is to control "the narrative" of male-female relationships and how they work.

What you see at a societal level as far as gender dynamics is just a macrocosm of what you see at the individual level. As a man, use that information accordingly.

[–]Senior Endorsed ContributorRian_Stone 42 points43 points  (14 children)

It's funny too. Once you start to develop mental models outside of those narratives, you begin to build you own. Thats when you tap into your value as a man, and begin to influence those around you.

e.g.

Antifa protest in Hamilton

Ever watch them from America? Socialism, anti american ism etc are all the narratives that turn these kids into some sort of exestential threat. Put that into a country with different cultural narratives, and 'white nationalists' are just dudes in flannel chastising children for burning down businesses.

If you have time, watch the whole thing, see if that doesn't change your opinion of the narratives surrounding antifa. And picture that from a femenine imperative narrative we have now

[–]Senior Endorsed ContributorCopperFox3c 29 points30 points  (8 children)

Oh we've got Antifa in America too ... nice people /s

The thing about the Mob, is that it never realizes it is the mob. I think I've seen clips of that video before, but will watch ...

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (6 children)

That your blog? I'm quite taken by it.

[–]Senior Endorsed ContributorRian_Stone 11 points12 points  (0 children)

It's a hidden gem in here. I really wish it got more play.

I had been reading it a year before I realized it belonged to copperfox

[–]Senior Endorsed ContributorCopperFox3c 4 points5 points  (3 children)

Thanks appreciate that, it is indeed. A little Red Pill spin on some broader topics.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (2 children)

Yeah, man. I like it a lot. I identify as democrat, not really liberal in the ways that most people who identify as liberal believe and I am absolutely sick of identity politics. With that said, I also cannot stand the far right these days. I really have no tolerance for either of the main extremes. Your blog speaks my language.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (1 child)

I'm so liberal I'm conservative.

Recall MLK's dream of judging men by the content of their characters rather than the color of their skin. Makes sense to me.

Identity politics stand a good chance of severing the left.

[–]wanderer779 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The problem with the identity politics strategy is its hard to maintain a broad coalition cause the tendency is for the groups to splinter into sects. It's like it's set up to divide and conquer itself by design.

On the other hand it is undeniably a very powerful tool that is making it an interesting time in the U.S. Hopefully we can avoid it getting too ugly.

[–]Endorsed Contributorex_addict_bro 3 points4 points  (4 children)

I do have some time but before I start watching could you give me the number of girls with hairy pussy that get punched in the face in that movie please?

[–]Senior Endorsed ContributorRian_Stone 2 points3 points  (2 children)

None, I'll sum. It up with one of my favourite lines

ya gotta admit, the coos have treated you really well

[–]Endorsed Contributorex_addict_bro 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Mind the language barrier. “Coos”?

[–]Senior Endorsed ContributorRian_Stone 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Cops...

Fat finger problem

[–]Mild111 17 points18 points  (3 children)

"Rape Jokes are NEVER funny"

..is one thing that really irritates me. The whole point of a rape joke is to play on the fact that it is an extreme behavior. It highlights the extreme nature of such acts. Every rape joke I've ever heard places the act in "normal" situations as a humorous contrast.

If we were in a Rape Culture™, the absurdity of rape wouldn't be the funny part of the joke...the notion that someone could consent (or that it would matter) would be the extreme.

[–]n0oo7 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Nobody complained when Peter got raped in family Guy.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (1 child)

"Picture Elmer Fudd raping Porky Pig"

-George Carlin on funny rape jokes.

[–]Proto_Sigma 7 points8 points  (0 children)

" If I was ever going to be raped, I'd like to be raped by Bill Cosby."

-Jim Jefferies

[–]Endorsed ContributorAuvergnat 18 points19 points  (2 children)

"We live in a rape culture" is the societal equivalent to "you don't love me anymore" in a relationship

  • It's an accusation, absolutely untrue but you can kinda see how this could be come up.

  • It's grave enough to make the accused feel the need to defend himself (themselves), and unfortunately by doing so giving the impression that the accusation could have a little bit of truth in it.

  • The entire purpose is of course to shame the man (men) to invite him to do/give more to the woman (women).

It's textbook beta manipulation.

[–]Senior Endorsed Contributormax_peenor 13 points14 points  (1 child)

"We live in a rape culture"

The rape culture isn't even rape. It's any situation that makes them uncomfortable. They promote a weak connection between things like a catcall and their inevitable kidnapping into an ally for forced vaginal intercourse. They then treat EVERY behavior as something that should be treated with the same disdain as we treat actual rape.

Unfortunately, most of them are too stupid to realize that everyone will just weaponize this against them, particularly as we saw with the whole gamer gate clusterfuck.

In the end, they always eat their own...

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's why mainstream cultural constructions are... constructed. To use them as weapons. They have mainly replaced old conventional weaponry (and sincerely, I think it's a big progress compared to being forcefully drafted and sent to face good chances of physical death).

This new system tilts the playing field in favour of women considerably, since they have a far more developed self-deception & deception arsenal than non-psychopatic & non-sociopathic men.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

It makes me wonder how Sweden will turn out with all their elected officials being female. I'm sure their government has some control over that culture narrative no?

[–]TheDevilsAdvokaat[🍰] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Very nicely put.

[–]southLDNlad[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Thanks for this, it's a good point

[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon 70 points71 points  (15 children)

The West does not have a rape culture

Ah... but by pretending that it does have a rape culture... the feminists leftists and SJWs aim to make ALL men responsible.

This is the objective. Rather than "some men rape", the SJW's claim "the West perpetuates a rape culture". Now you can blame every single man that ever lives or has lived, and "I have never raped anyone" is no defence.

The idea is to make men feel collectively guilty and collectively responsible. The result (as intended) is protectiveness, white knighting, attention and resources flowing to women. SJW's thrive on inducing guilt. They have been successful with white shame and now with male guilt.

We saw the same thing with "patriarchy". Make men responsible for manufactured crimes that they never committed, by virtue of simply existing.

As men we need to free ourselves from all guilt and all responsibility for anything that we didn't directly do. "I didn't do that" is the simple answer. Any further attacks including "But you're part of a system that..." and "Maybe you didn't directly do this, but you are part of a culture that..." get the same response: "I didn't do this, this is nothing to do with me".

We can throw out white guilt too. Unless you actually deliberately did something, you are not responsible for it.

Male responsibility is our strength: we take responsibility for ourselves and our actions. Do not let the world subvert this strength by making you take on responsibility for anyone else's actions.

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Male responsibility is our strength: we take responsibility for ourselves and our actions. Do not let the world subvert this strength by making you take on responsibility for anyone else's actions.

You can expand this to the West as a whole: We are compassionate, open with knowledge, and tolerant of others. These traits are used against us over and over again. Examples: Refugee crisis; Iranian and NK nuclear programs; Fatwas against those who criticize Islam in open Western societies.

[–]Bisuboy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Currently, our culture, public views (via politicians, news and social media) and our education system are rotten to the core by leftist SJW types. They completely control the narrative. They want to destroy manhood until every man is a soyboy shemale, they want to shame success and normalize mediocrity, failure and degeneracy. They will not stop until the west is as much of a shithole as a country like Somalia.

I believe this huge cultural degeneracy and self-hate is the biggest problem that the west has ever faced, and it grew out of the luxury that our forefathers built for us by conquering the world. We grew up without any real problems and with every right you could possibly imagine, and as a result we now have masses of people protesting to take in barbarians that bring in problems and for the government to take away our rights. Ironic.

[–]Throwawaysteve123456 -1 points0 points  (4 children)

The unbelievable irony of the whole thing is in the west we have had an increase in sexual assaults over the last few years, objectively. Without softening the criteria. Yet the media refuses to acknowledge why, despite it being incredibly obvious. There are huge parts of the world with major issues with woman's rights, and have a legit rape culture. You import a large volume of the populace that has a rape culture, and you will see the incidence rate of sexual assaults increase. Yet you can't openly talk about it, and it results in the legal system being modified, as if this is an organic issue. The result is unjust convictions for soft issues around clarifying consent, meanwhile disturbing sexual assaults are actually increasing. It's unbelievable when you zoom out and think about it.

[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon 2 points3 points  (3 children)

The unbelievable irony of the whole thing is in the west we have had an increase in sexual assaults over the last few years, objectively. Without softening the criteria.

Got a link to this? From what I've seen, serious assaults have been decreasing for decades.

meanwhile disturbing sexual assaults are actually increasing.

Because of immigration? Any links/data to back up this point?

[–]Throwawaysteve123456 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Official stats: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/File:Police-recorded_rape,_sexual_assault,_intentional_homicide_and_assault,_EU-28,_2008%E2%80%9315_(2008_%3D_100)_V2.png

Sexual assault declining slightly (this would include everything), while rape has specifically increased (rape = more physical control, wouldn't include more grey consent issues).

[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon 0 points1 point  (1 child)

As I thought... this is REPORTED crime. Obviously very different to actual crime. Trivially explained by the increased likelihood of women to report rape rather than increase in the underlying frequency.

[–]Throwawaysteve123456 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well the argument brought forth was that it was softening of the criteria of sexual assault, yet that doesn't explain why sexual assaults have decreased, while rapes have increased. The criteria for what constitutes a rape has not changed in Sweeden. I totally understand your argument, but this is actually happening. It took a bit of research, but it looks legit unfortunately. Also, rapes are much more common in certain parts of the world.

[–]1OneRedSock 38 points39 points  (4 children)

The most egregious danger of the Western infatuation with rape culture and putting the onus on the accused to prove their own innocence is the slow deconstruction of something so concrete as the temporal. Time passes inexorably forward and what has happened is done and cannot be changed. Yet the feminine imperative seeks to actually reach into the past and change the meaning and reality of events that have already happened based on the fluid and subjective feelings of women as years pass, based on current norms in social interaction today. We should all be very, very concerned about this manipulation of past reality.

We see this with so much of the MeToo movement, where women are calling out men who had socially acceptable interactions 10, 20, 30 years ago -- the climate then was less insane -- and now upon reflection find that what happened is not acceptable, by today's ever-increasing feminine authoritarian reality.

The erosion of innocent until proven guilty and the instability of temporal reality are serious dangers to the stability of law and objective rationality, which are some of the most important pillars of Western democracies. While TRP is excellent at operating outside social norms in regards to sexual exploits and gratification, none of us should be encouraging or ignoring the move towards guilty until proven innocent and giving credence to women who find their sad lives as a cat lady aren't what they thought it would be, so lets call rape on the guy who alpha widowed them 20 years ago.

[–]blister333 5 points6 points  (0 children)

the witch hunt factor is the most fearful part of all this

[–]southLDNlad[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Totally agree

[–]Chainsawninja 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right"

[–]Black_m0ngoose 49 points50 points  (2 children)

The West does not have a rape culture.

You are wrong.

The West does have a rape culture.

Just as a woman's value is derived from her fertility-

-a man's value is derived from his ability to obtain resources.

Right now, highly productive men are being financially raped by women using the government as their instrument.

[–]freshoutofgravitas 18 points19 points  (1 child)

that's what I was thinking. heavy taxes on young single men, and divorce rape, are about the only active rape culture in the west, outside of prisons

[–]blister333 0 points1 point  (0 children)

i dont think taxes are high. i think the way the money is spent is highly inefficient

[–][deleted] 18 points19 points  (0 children)

We do have a rape culture. Lotsa women fantasizing about rape:

  • Romance novel share of the U.S. fiction market: 34% $1.08 billion
  • Fifty Shades Of Grey' Sales Topped 100 Million
  • Top categories for porn women watch "rough sex" and "gangbang"
  • Research shows up to 57% of women have "forced sex" fantasies

It's called PROJECTION

[–]1scissor_me_timbers00 6 points7 points  (5 children)

Yeah it’s truly disgusting the way the left turns reality upside down and then lords it over everybody with their moral crusading. There IS a rape culture in those countries you mentioned, but more relevant is the rape culture among immigrants in Europe from those particular countries. But the left ignores and downplays this. Meanwhile they grossly exaggerate rape among normal native citizens. It’s absolutely nauseating.

[–]_penseroso_ 4 points5 points  (4 children)

Rather than say "The Left", perhaps consider saying "The Establishment" or "The Cathedral". All of these policies support the upper echelon / rich tier of society.

[–]1scissor_me_timbers00 0 points1 point  (3 children)

That’s fair. I am a fan of the Cathedral concept. But that comprises most of the modern left, so I’ve come to use them interchangeably. Although it is important to distinguish from what I call “good faith liberals” who I may not always agree with, but who actively work against the hardcore progressive bullshit. People like Jonothan haidt.

[–]_penseroso_ 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Yep exactly. I’m pretty conservative, but there are lots of reasonable liberal people out there. Not all of them are far left nutcases.

[–]1scissor_me_timbers00 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yes, most of the left I presume is fairly reasonable. The problem tho is that their views and opinions tend to be rooted in what’s morally fashionable, and so they tend to drift with wherever the more hardcore progressive agenda is pushing the Overton window. Even reasonable people have come under this derangement of current leftism. They may not be crazy themselves but they are amenable to it and tend to foster it. Like my otherwise very smart and reasonable coastal lib friends have totally succumbed to trump derangement syndrome, rather than a more grounded critique of the man.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I view the “reasonable” lefties like I view the “moderate” Muslims. They may not be the ones strapping bombs on themselves and blowing up the buildings, but they are providing the sea of passive support which allows the radicals to move freely.

Same with lefties. They may not personally be advocating the most insane policies, but they passively support the actions of the far left. They buy into the racist/sexist/whatever dynamic. They don’t care a bit about individual freedom. If you say we need to clear the radicals out of academia or government, they will just shrug their shoulders. They provide passive support to the radicals who make our lives miserable.

[–][deleted] 29 points30 points  (8 children)

About the closest thing to "rape culture" was the Incels sub. Some of them promoted rape yes, but do you think those sloths of men who are to scared to even take control of their own lives would fearlessly rape a woman and commit a felony? It's very doubtful.

What's also baffling is the relationship between third wave feminists and Islam, and how they don't put any energy fighting an actual misogynistic culture. Religion is a social system like a government. It's by no means free from criticism. My generation is so oblivious and ignorant it's appalling, and it'll lead to our down fall.

[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon 37 points38 points  (1 child)

nd how they don't put any energy fighting an actual misogynistic culture

To women, real misogyny is terrifying. Women don't want to attack a culture that will actually hurt them for it.

Much easier to attack a soft target: "Nice guys are so sexist!" is a fun article to write and noone fears retribution from nice guys.

Inviting the vitriol of an actual misogynistic culture? Fuck no, that's a terrible idea, bad things might happen to the author.

Actual defence of women is not the objective in these articles.

[–]StonerTigerMom 5 points6 points  (0 children)

This is interesting and likely true.

[–]Hjalmbere 10 points11 points  (5 children)

At first glance it may seem baffling, but if you scratch the surface of 3rd wave feminism you realize that they hate democracy, Western Civilization, and capitalism just as much as the Islamists.

On a personal plane: 3rd wave feminists can be great fun in bed, just like most other crazy women, but you have to ask yourself if a crazy woman that can land you in trouble is worth bedding.

[–]CovetedCodex 4 points5 points  (4 children)

I thought it was the rule to not put your dick in crazy?

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (2 children)

IMHO you can put your dick in crazy if you adhere to Biggies 10 crack commandments

[–]i_forget_my_userids 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Rule number uno: never let no one know how much dough you hold

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Number 5: never sell no crack where you rest at

Don't let these hoes know where you live or they'll slash your tires when you drop them

[–]Hjalmbere 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Depends on how crazy, logistics, and consent laws IMHO.

[–]notonlyplace 5 points6 points  (2 children)

Your logic is dupe, but they rewrote the rules, Rape culture isn't about rape, I talked to a feminist and here is her perspective.

  • Rape culture is hitting on girls
  • Rape culture is breaking up with a girl for not having sex with you
  • Rape culture is smoking weed with a girl and having sex with her
  • Rape culture is drinking alcohol and having sex with her

They expand the definition of rape, this is how the CDC get's 1in 5, they ask women

"Has your boyfriend ever threaten to leave you if you refused to have sex with him"

If she answers yes, she is raped, now society won't accept this, in fact many women do not identify with feminist because they are so god damn crazy that most women consider the word a bad thing.

So they slowly change the perception and definition,

[–]sleepyweaselisawake 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I was told recently that having FWBs and having sex outside of a committed relationship perpetuates rape culture. Fascinating stuff.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is why we can no longer any trust any statistics put out by the left or the government.

[–]Senior Endorsed ContributorRian_Stone 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Recently, I have been told that I perpetuate a Rape Culture

If I ever heard this I would laugh, and amplify it until everyone knew the absurdity of it. I also perpetuate turtle genocide and plumber stereotypes when I play Mario Kart. I am Rian, destroyer of words. Now excuse me while I get my rape phone, call my rape attourney, and get into my rape car to pay for my McRapey with fries, and wash it down with GRape soda.

No one has a fucking rape culture. 'culture' is a word people can throw at the end of nonsense to give it credibility. It's a box, filled with all the authority, rigor, and societal expectations, with the 'rape' sticker thrown on the front, then shipped to your door.

I didn't order this, I didn't make it, I don't want it. It's your piece of shit package, you can deal with it

No one has a rape culture. People barely have culture. Strip away our shared TV shows, name brand clothing and video games, and most people are empty husks. We don't have a rape culture. We either have places where guys CAN rape a girl and not be murdered/jailed, and places where guys cannot. We all live where they cannot. People in civil wars or without any sort of police infrastructure can.

So that girl isn't going to fuck you, and she's a drain on everyone around her. Laugh at monkeys when they throw feces, enjoy your day. I for one won't talk to those monkeys about the how monkeys throw bigger shit in the Jungles of Vietnam.

[–]halfback910 4 points5 points  (1 child)

If rape culture exists for anything it's for female on male rape (generally in the case of older females and male children/youths). That's the shit nobody cares about.

[–]southLDNlad[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is a really good video on that subject, with the guy telling his stories on the two occasions it happened to him as a minor.

https://youtu.be/IVWS0BiFfxU

[–][deleted] 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Look at the situation with Stormy Daniels. She was a prostitute that Trump paid and now she is suddenly a victim. It is like going into Burger King and ordering a Whopper and then a year later someone hands the money back to you and then says you stole the food.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Every false, public, widespread myth serves a different, hidden myth (something a group of people need to believe, and then want to believe).

For example, in war, the false myth that the enemy is the "absolute evil" serves the need to believe the false myth that your side entered the war for selfless purposes, and is completely "good".

The rape myth is essential aid to women need to believe myths about their real nature — and then, to believe myths that cover from their own sight their real nature too.

[–]Putins_Masseuse 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This sub is a breath of fresh air from the rest of Reddit

[–]jeffplaya 1 point2 points  (1 child)

The west does have a rape culture it's just in prisons.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Surprised I had to scroll so far to see this.

[–]KeithRSRedPill 1 point2 points  (0 children)

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm The above link lists the number of forcible rapes by year, population by year and the number of forcible rapes per 100,000 in the US. In 1992, there were 42.8 forcible rapes per 100,000 and in 2016 there were 29.6 per 100,000 or about a 31% decrease since 1993. The advent of DNA testing is likely a contributing factor to the decrease since it makes the rapist more easy to identify. If we lived in a rape culture, you'd think that rape would be increasing instead of decreasing. US women declaring themselves to be living in a rape culture because they group themselves with women living in countries where rape is prevalent doesn't appear to be a valid argument based on the decreasing rape statistics for the US. There also appears to be an attempt to redefine what actions constitute rape. In the past, you'd get laughed out of court if you claimed that you were raped a decade ago and what had been consensual sex was redefined as non-consensual after an extended period of time.

[–]bluepillsissy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

More men are raped in the US than women, according to this article:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2449454/More-men-raped-US-women-including-prison-sexual-abuse.html

But, you don't hear about things like this too often. Doesn't play well into the female victim narrative.

[–]greenlittleman 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Rape by definition ISN'T a sex WITHOUT consent - this is a sex AGAINST other person consent. But this fact is broadly ignored - people doesn't know a difference.

[–]DeChef2 1 point2 points  (3 children)

What would you say is the modern definition or chivalry, and, what would you say is the real one?

[–]5t3fan0 0 points1 point  (2 children)

im no historian
i think that broadly speaking, originally being chivalrous was the way of knighthood, as in the morals and rules that a proper knight and/or noble in early/middle medieval times should follow: be a skilled warrior and horseman (and rich enough to afford a war horse, weapons&armours&squires), protect the weak citiziens/fight the evil citiziens (administer justice if needed), serve your king and kingdom and the Church, protect christiandom and slay its enemies (witches, muslims, eretics), be just and righteous and honorable and a good christian.... all of these very broad ideas then changed with the passing of times, geopolitical turmoils and new art and poetry made on the subject

[–]southLDNlad[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

That's a common misconception. Chivalry had very little to do with morality in the medieval period. Think of it as an equation that goes like this - (Skill at Arms + x), wherein x is equivalent to whatever your lord or king wanted it to mean. One lord would say that chivalry meant looking after the defenceless, whilst another would say that it meant raping and pillaging the villages of rival feifdoms. Both were correct.

Chivalry as we know today is more about pandering to women, and doing what they require because we ought to.

[–]DeChef2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah, okay, the last part clears it up, thanks.

[–]smartslutboy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

RAPE IS NOT SOCIALLY ACCEPTABLE ANYWHERE!

I find that people emphasizing rape culture in places like the middle east mostly don't know what they're talking about. Take that recently I saw a Pakistani crime show about a girl who is raped and commits suicide, nothing revolutionary but it goes to show that rape isn't just a nonchalant occurrence. It's illegal, women don't want to be raped and men don't like the thought of their wives/mothers being raped. Do you think that men from the middle east are entirely cognitive different creatures? They have morality and sympathy for their loved ones like everyone else. There's no doubt that many countries objectify and put nearly all blame of rape on women, but none of them think it's a-okay as a whole. What makes these countries rape cultures are because of the victim blaming, and victim blaming is still not uncommon in the west. Not to say that one isn't clearly more severe than the other, but one being less severe doesn't make it trivial

(edit)

No i'm not a connoisseur in eastern culture but I was raised in that background and rapists are seen as senseless dogs. You're wrong to think eastern and western culture have some distinct departure in their views of women.

If you think that something being illegal means there isn't a culture promoting it then your whole muslim rape culture idea gets thrown out because rape is illegal in every muslim country. Barely enforced because of shitty policing and shame, but is illegal nonetheless. Also, does that apply for everything? I mean a minor smoking anything is illegal, are you to say that teens don't feel a pressure to drink or smoke to be cool? Clearly, something being illegal doesn't always divert peoples views on it. Marital rape is still legal or at least semi-legal in many countries you may consider to be particularly civilized and forward

Clearly, your perspective isn't well thought out and i'm inclined to believe this all stems from a bias against brown immigrant or something

[–]inexorable_stratagem 1 point2 points  (1 child)

If you go to jail beacause you raped someone other inmates there will treat you like a pig. No one respects a rapist. Yet, they claim men cultivate a rape culture.

You might steal hundreds of people, kill a dozen more and still be respected in jail. But, if you are there because you raped someone, not a single person there will respect you.

Rape is NOT accepted by men. (And this is how it should be)

[–]flipman335 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hey OP, I understand when we talk about "rape culture" it can seem nonexistent or invisible compared to other countries. And tbh that's how I thought too. Additionally, I understand how saying men perpetuate a rape culture may seem crazy especially because as a male, I'm sure you or most people you know probably aren't going around looking to rape women. But I think when people talk about rape culture in the West, it's more about coercion and the unequal power struggles that make women feel unsafe within Western hookup culture. For example, at a college fraternity party, when all the brothers provide the house for the party and the alcohol and are cheering each other to get laid, it can cause a women to feel unsafe and have sex for their own safety. On a macroscopic level, it is the normalization of sexual violence against women. This looks like what I mentioned above, or victim blaming ("She asked for it!"), allowing men who have sex a lot to be looked upon favorably while women who have a lot of sex are immediately "whores" etc.. So yes, I agree that the problems we have here are not nearly as horrendous as what happens in the Middle East or Africa, but that does not mean problems here do not exist. Here's a link for some more information about rape culture: http://www.southernct.edu/sexual-misconduct/facts.html

[–]naanguard 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Um....the west does have a Rape Culture..they Rape Men Financially in Divorce......

[–]truegemred 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Turkey is a muslim country which dooesn't have a rape culture.

Educate yourself because after reading that you lost all credibility for me

[–]AthenaPallas 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In South Africa, there’s even a term, “jack rolling”, which is rape done for fun and to prove the perp’s “bravado”, but in the US, the land of #metoo, political correctness supersedes the suffering of those victims.

[–]Chaddeus_Rex 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I am aware consent can be revoked during sex

That concept is fucked up though. If you think about it, why do people need to verbalize consent, when much of the sexual act is implied and not spoken about. If she went on a date with you, if she then took a taxi or walked home with you, if she took her clothes off and has your dick inside of her - how does it make any sense to say that she needs to verbalize consent? That just kills the entire mood. Do fucking law makers ever get laid that they come up with this shit?

[–]Scorchyy 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Lol, I feel like you watched Gavin McInnes video on this subject

[–]southLDNlad[S] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Didn't even know there was one, but I'll check it out haha

[–]Scorchyy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is one, I haven’t watched it yet but I saw the thumbnail on Youtube, there’s too many Gavin vids to watch them all 😝

[–]perplexedm 2 points3 points  (5 children)

Pakistan has a rape culture. Rwanda has a rape culture. Saudia Arabia has a rape culture.

If there is a rape culture in these countries, why everyone is not raping each other everyday ?

Don't know about Rwanda, but don't think news about PK and SA is what all is propagated around.

[–]southLDNlad[S] 1 point2 points  (4 children)

Rapes do occur every day in these countries. But they mainly occur between husband and wife, as the women do not have the right to say no in the man's eyes.

[–]perplexedm 0 points1 point  (1 child)

But they mainly occur between husband and wife, as the women do not have the right to say no in the man's eyes.

But then, western women do have all the rights and entitlements to say no whenever they want and here you are in this sub griping about western women and their entitled behavior.

[–]Chaddeus_Rex 0 points1 point  (1 child)

But they mainly occur between husband and wife,

A husband can't rape a wife and a wife can't rape a husband. Claiming the opposite is absurd and nonesense.

Do you even what the initial purpose of marriage was? A man provisions a woman with resources and a woman gives men sex. Marriage is implicent consent to have sex with the husband whenever he wants it.

[–]J3diJ0nes 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Amazing job of intellectualizing this. Thank you.

[–]1v1crown 1 point2 points  (4 children)

Rape Culture - Laws in place that actively promote/enable rape

American Law - Zero laws in place that actively promote/enable rape, in fact, all laws regarding rape punish the rapist

That's it. Written verifiable proof that we are not living in a "rape culture"

[–]24032014 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Well, child marriage is something I’d consider rape culture. It still happens in some states

[–]1v1crown 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The youngest age you can get married by state. In most states, you must be at least 18 years old to marry. However, state laws make exceptions if minors have parental consent, the approval of a judge or are recognized as adults (i.e. emancipated minors).

If anyone marries a minor without following these rules, they are breaking the law. Again, there are no laws that enforce rape.

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[removed]

    [–]Forcetobereckonedwit 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Fantastic thread.

    [–]gains_o_clock 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    wait where in Islam is that culture promoted?? that seems messed the hell up

    [–]southLDNlad[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    Here's something for you to read :)

    Here are a few quotes from the Koran explaining why it is okay to rape. And yet somehow the Left refuses to acknowledge this. Enjoy.

    TL;DR Allah says it's okay to rape people, yet there's definitely no rape culture in Islam.

    This hadith provides the context for the Quranic verse (4:24):

    The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain.  They met their enemy and fought with them.  They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him)were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers.  So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Qur’anic verse: (Sura 4:24) "And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess." (Abu Dawud 2150, also Muslim 3433)

    Actually, as the hadith indicates, it wasn't Muhammad, but "Allah the Exalted" who told the men to rape the women in front of their husbands - which is all the more reason to think of Islam as being very different from other religions.

    Note also that the husbands of these unfortunate victims were obviously alive after battle.  This is important because it flatly contradicts those apologists who like to argue that the women Muhammad enslaved were widowed and thus unable to fend for themselves.  (Even if the apologists were right, what sort of a moral code is it that forces a widow to choose between being raped and starving?) 

    There are several other episodes in which Muhammad is offered the clear opportunity to disavow raping women - yet he instead offers advice on how to proceed.  In one case, his men were reluctant to devalue their female commodities for future resale by getting them pregnant.  Muhammad was asked about coitus interruptus in particular:

    "O Allah's Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?"  The Prophet said, "Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it. No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence.”(Bukhari 34:432)

    As indicated, the prophet of Islam did not mind his men raping the women, provided they ejaculated within the bodies of their victims.

    As one might imagine, Muhammad's obvious approval of raping women captured in battle (and his own personal participation, as recorded in many places) is of intense inconvenience to the Muslim apologists of our time.  For this reason, some of them attempt to explain away these many episodes and Quranic references to sex with captives by pretending that these are cases in which women have fled bad marriages and sought refuge with the Muslims.  Some apologists even refer to them as "wives," even though the Quran makes a clear distinction between "those whom thy right hand possesses" and true wives (see Sura 33:50).

    Beyond the desperation of the 21st century apologist however, there is absolutely nothing in the historical text to support this rosy revision of Muslim history.  The women of the Banu Mustaliq, for example, were sold into slavery following their rape:

    "We went out with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi'l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing 'azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah's Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter" (Sahih Muslim 3371)

    In fact, female slaves were traded like any other simple commodity by Muhammad and his band of devoted followers:

    "Then the apostle sent Sa-d b. Zayd al-Ansari, brother of Abdu'l-Ashal with some of the captive women of Banu Qurayza to Najd and he sold them for horses and weapons."(Ibn Ishaq/Hisham/Hisham 693)

    Is it Islamic to sell one's wife for horses?  Clearly these were not wives!

    Also, by definition, a "captured" woman is not one who is fleeing her husband.  She is fleeing her captor (ie. the Muslim slave raider).  This hadith describes a typical raid, in which the women and children are captured as they are attempting to flee the attacking Muslims:

    “…and then we attacked from all sides and reached their watering-place where a battle was fought.  Some of the enemies were killed and some were taken prisoners.  I saw a group of persons that consisted of women and children [escaping in the distance].  I was afraid lest they should reach the mountain before me, so I shot an arrow between them and the mountain.  When they saw the arrow, they stopped.  So I brought them, driving them along” (Sahih Muslim 4345)

    The Muslim narrator sees the women trying to escape (following the massacre of their men) and cuts off their route by shooting an arrow into their path.  These aren't women trying to seek refuge with the Muslims.  They are trying to avoid capture by the Muslims.

    The same hadith goes on to recount that Muhammad traded one of these captured women as a ransom to a different tribe.  The passage belies the fact that one intention of the captors was to have sex with their 'product':

    I drove them along until I brought them to Abu Bakr who bestowed that girl upon me as a prize.  So we arrived in Medina.  I had not yet disrobed her when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) met me in the street and said: “Give me that girl.”(Sahih Muslim 4345)

    [–]gains_o_clock 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    alright so I consider myself as a moderate RPer and just a moderate in real life. I'm conservative but the Republicans of today are selfish bastards and save for a few I would not vote for them. Democrats are stupid puppets and I'd feel guilty voting for them bc they'd be the reason our country is going to trash.

    With that out of the way, I always call out BS on fake or made up stuff that so many people seem to say these days, and honestly thought I was about to when I found that the one verse you used from the Quran was cut off and taken out of context. Check out the full verse first.

    But when I went to do this and read an explanation it really got my gears going and I found out that the interpretations of this are all over the place. The "schools of thought" all agree on most of it yet disagree on some crucial parts and that's why there's so much conflict.

    If you really want to know what that verse means here's a copy+paste from a scholar's interpretation and if you want to keep believing what you believe just skip this and go on w your day:

    Women who come as captives of war, leaving their husbands behind in Dar al-Harb (Domain of War), are not prohibited, for their marriage is nullified by virtue of their entry into Dar al-Islam (Domain of Islam). A man may marry such women and, if they happen to be his slave-girls, he may have sexual relations with them. There is disagreement, however, among jurists as to what should be done if both husband and wife have been taken captive together. Abu Hanifah and the jurists of his school are of the opinion that their marriage should remain intact. Malik and Shafi'i, on the other hand, argue that their matrimonial contract should be rendered void.

    Many misunderstandings seem to persist about the right to have sexual relations with one's slave-girls. It is pertinent to call attention to the following regulations of Islam:

    (1) Islam does not permit soldiers of the Islamic army to have sexual relations with women they capture in war. Islamic Law requires that such women should first be handed over to the government, which then has the right to decide what should be done with them. It may either set them free unconditionally, release them on payment of ransom, exchange them for Muslim prisoners of war held by the enemy or distribute them among the soldiers. A soldier may have sexual relations only with that woman who has been entrusted to him by the government.

    (2) Even then, he may not have sexual relations with her until at least one menstrual period has expired; this is in order to establish that she is not already pregnant. If the woman concerned is pregnant one may not have sexual relations with her until after the birth of her child.

    (3) It is not necessary for female captives of war to be People of the Book in order that sexual relations with them be permitted. The man to whom such a woman is entrusted has the right to have sexual relations with her regardless of her religious affiliations.

    (4) Only that person to whom a female captive has been entrusted has the right to have sexual relations with her. Any child born to her will be regarded as the legitimate child of her master, and will be entitled to all the rights laid down by the Law for one's issue. Moreover, once such a woman has given birth to a child she may not be sold to anyone, and on the death of her master she automatically becomes a free person.

    (5) If the master allows the woman to marry someone else he ceases to have the right to sexual relations with her but retains the right to have her serve him in other ways.

    (6) Although the Law has fixed the maximum number of wives at four, it has set no limit with regard to slave-girls. The Law does not lay down a limit in order to encourage people to accumulate huge armies of slave-girls, and thereby turn their homes into dens of sexual enjoyment. Rather the Law does not define the limit because the effects of war and the total number of female captives that would have to be disposed of after a certain war are unpredictable.

    (7) In the same way as other rights of property are transferable, so are the proprietary rights regarding the captives of war that have been legally entrusted to a man by the state.

    (8) Since the regular conferment of property rights is as legal an act as that of marriage, there is no basis for a person who feels no revulsion towards the idea of marriage to feel revulsion towards the idea of having sexual relations with a slave-girl duly entrusted to him.

    (9) If a government confers proprietary rights to a man over a female captive of war it forfeits the right to withdraw those rights in the same way as the guardian (wali) of a woman ceases to have the right to withdraw his agreement to the marriage proposal after the marriage has been contracted.

    (10) If a military commander permitted his soldiers to temporarily use the female captives as objects of sexual desire and distributed them among the soldiers for that purpose, such an act would be considered unlawful by Islamic Law. Such an act is not essentially different from fornication or adultery

    [–]Eat-the-Poor 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    Just posting this is basically rape. Turn yourself in or I will. /s

    [–]southLDNlad[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    The sad bit is I live in the UK where it's not impossible to imagine this becoming illegal soon :/

    [–]DiamondxCrafting 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    Just want to understand your POV

    pls nu h8? (corrections and rational, logical arguments are welcomed)

    Do you go to jail for stealing? Yes. Then there isn't a theft culture. Do you go to jail for rape? Yes. Then there isn't a rape culture because it isn't socially acceptable.

    I'm pretty sure that's something present in most countries.

    If you are genuinely worried about rape cultures, look at countries in the Middle East and Africa where rape is socially acceptable, and try to do something to help them.

    Egypt (Majority of muslims and it's in the Middle East and Africa), rape isn't socially acceptable, harassers are evens sometimes tied to a tree or something in the street and shamed and rape's obviously illegal and yes you'd go to jail for that. So, there's no rape culture there either

    This is found within any Muslim State that enforces the teachings of the Koran. There is your rape culture.

    Could you maybe give an example of such thing from the Quran while not taking it out of context?

    P.S: this is also worth looking at: http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Crime/Rape-rate#2009 now compare a western country like the USA and a middle eastern country like Egypt

    [–]southLDNlad[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    Have a read of this.

    The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain.  They met their enemy and fought with them.  They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him)were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers.  So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Qur’anic verse: (Sura 4:24) "And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess." (Abu Dawud 2150, also Muslim 3433)

    Actually, as the hadith indicates, it wasn't Muhammad, but "Allah the Exalted" who told the men to rape the women in front of their husbands - which is all the more reason to think of Islam as being very different from other religions.

    Note also that the husbands of these unfortunate victims were obviously alive after battle.  This is important because it flatly contradicts those apologists who like to argue that the women Muhammad enslaved were widowed and thus unable to fend for themselves.  (Even if the apologists were right, what sort of a moral code is it that forces a widow to choose between being raped and starving?) 

    There are several other episodes in which Muhammad is offered the clear opportunity to disavow raping women - yet he instead offers advice on how to proceed.  In one case, his men were reluctant to devalue their female commodities for future resale by getting them pregnant.  Muhammad was asked about coitus interruptus in particular:

    "O Allah's Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?"  The Prophet said, "Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it. No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence.”(Bukhari 34:432)

    As indicated, the prophet of Islam did not mind his men raping the women, provided they ejaculated within the bodies of their victims.

    As one might imagine, Muhammad's obvious approval of raping women captured in battle (and his own personal participation, as recorded in many places) is of intense inconvenience to the Muslim apologists of our time.  For this reason, some of them attempt to explain away these many episodes and Quranic references to sex with captives by pretending that these are cases in which women have fled bad marriages and sought refuge with the Muslims.  Some apologists even refer to them as "wives," even though the Quran makes a clear distinction between "those whom thy right hand possesses" and true wives (see Sura 33:50).

    Beyond the desperation of the 21st century apologist however, there is absolutely nothing in the historical text to support this rosy revision of Muslim history.  The women of the Banu Mustaliq, for example, were sold into slavery following their rape:

    "We went out with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi'l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing 'azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah's Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter" (Sahih Muslim 3371)

    In fact, female slaves were traded like any other simple commodity by Muhammad and his band of devoted followers:

    "Then the apostle sent Sa-d b. Zayd al-Ansari, brother of Abdu'l-Ashal with some of the captive women of Banu Qurayza to Najd and he sold them for horses and weapons."(Ibn Ishaq/Hisham/Hisham 693)

    Is it Islamic to sell one's wife for horses?  Clearly these were not wives!

    Also, by definition, a "captured" woman is not one who is fleeing her husband.  She is fleeing her captor (ie. the Muslim slave raider).  This hadith describes a typical raid, in which the women and children are captured as they are attempting to flee the attacking Muslims:

    “…and then we attacked from all sides and reached their watering-place where a battle was fought.  Some of the enemies were killed and some were taken prisoners.  I saw a group of persons that consisted of women and children [escaping in the distance].  I was afraid lest they should reach the mountain before me, so I shot an arrow between them and the mountain.  When they saw the arrow, they stopped.  So I brought them, driving them along” (Sahih Muslim 4345)

    The Muslim narrator sees the women trying to escape (following the massacre of their men) and cuts off their route by shooting an arrow into their path.  These aren't women trying to seek refuge with the Muslims.  They are trying to avoid capture by the Muslims.

    The same hadith goes on to recount that Muhammad traded one of these captured women as a ransom to a different tribe.  The passage belies the fact that one intention of the captors was to have sex with their 'product':

    I drove them along until I brought them to Abu Bakr who bestowed that girl upon me as a prize.  So we arrived in Medina.  I had not yet disrobed her when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) met me in the street and said: “Give me that girl.”(Sahih Muslim 4345)

    [–]DiamondxCrafting 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Sura 4:24 that you cited (but it's the full verse): And [also prohibited to you are all] married women except those your right hands possess. [This is] the decree of Allah upon you. And lawful to you are [all others] beyond these, [provided] that you seek them [in marriage] with [gifts from] your property, desiring chastity, not unlawful sexual intercourse. So for whatever you enjoy [of marriage] from them, give them their due compensation as an obligation. And there is no blame upon you for what you mutually agree to beyond the obligation. Indeed, Allah is ever Knowing and Wise.

    Here's the thing, as a sunni muslim if there's a hadith that contradicts the Quran, it's rejected.

    here's the full hadith about that arrow and seemingly the messanger of Allah taking the girl to himself: It has been narrated on the authority of Salama (b. al-Akwa') who said:

    We fought against the Fazara and Abu Bakr was the commander over us. He had been appointed by the Messenger oi Allah (ﷺ). When we were onlv at an hour's distance from the water of the enemy, Abu Bakr ordered us to attack. We made a halt during the last part of the night tor rest and then we attacked from all sides and reached their watering-place where a battle was fought. Some of the enemies were killed and some were taken prisoners. I saw a group of persons that consisted of women and children. I was afraid lest they should reach the mountain before me, so I shot an arrow between them and the mountain. When they saw the arrow, they stopped. So I brought them, driving them along. Among them was a woman from Banu Fazara. She was wearing a leather coat. With her was her daughter who was one of the prettiest girls in Arabia. I drove them along until I brought them to Abu Bakr who bestowed that girl upon me as a prize. So we arrived in Medina. I had not yet disrobed her when the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) met me in the street and said: Give me that girl, O Salama. I said: Messenger of Allah, she has fascinated me. I had not yet disrobed her. When on the next day. the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) ag;tin met me in the street, he said: O Salama, give me that girl, may God bless your father. I said: She is for you. Messenger of Allah! By Allah. I have not yet disrobed her. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) sent her to the people of Mecca, and surrendered her as ransom for a number of Muslims who had been kept as prisoners at Mecca.

    Does Islam Permit Muslim Men to Rape Their Slave Girls?

    Scripture has never permitted men to engage in sex outside the institution of marriage whether this is from the category of free believing women, or from the category of 'right hands possess'.

    [–]Ray_pinasses1210 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    What’s almost offensive about modern feminism claiming the West is promoting “rape culture” Is that these shrews are very ignorant what an actual rape culture is. Places like India, and Pakistan where women literally get gang-raped to death, places in the middle east where they perform female genital mutilation.

    These feminists are so deluded and hysterical that they truly have no idea what an actual rape culture is

    Going on an awkward date=rape to these women

    [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    So many Hollywood ( well the BBC also) films have scenes of rape in them( because it is cheap shock method ), that people start to believe it is an often occurring phenomenon. Just like with murder. People believe thanks to a constant consumption of thrillers, and murder mysteries that there are an insane amount of psychopathic serial killers out there.

    Moslems are just noble savages, they only do evil things because the West has influenced them badly. For the rest Islamic culture is very beautifull.

    [–]oneknocka -1 points0 points  (2 children)

    you're off a bit though. It's not just about what laws exist but how they are enforced.

    [–]Fedor_Gavnyukov 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    pretty sure the laws are enforced very well here for the most part. even in the environment of people the society deemed "bad" (aka prisons), the rapists get the worst end of the stick every time. so yeah, there is no rape culture as the feminists would like their feeble minded idiot followers to believe

    [–]LazyEyeJones 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    If you watch some of milo yiannopoulos' videos. He states quite clearly why rape culture doesn't exist in the western world. I will add a link if I can find the video later on. https://youtu.be/jWhx3QamB04

    [–]Theguygotgame777 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    “Your wives are as a tilth to you, so approach your tilth when or how ye will.”

    Quran 2:223

    [–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (2 children)

    Do you go to jail for stealing? Yes. Then there isn't a theft culture.

    LOL. You have much to learn, young one.

    [–]southLDNlad[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

    A culture of theft implies that society condones or rewards theft. When a society punishes and casts out those who commit theft, you can safely say there is no theft culture.

    [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Do Wall Streeters go to jail when they 're bailed out? Do the politicians who bail them out go to jail?

    LOL. That really sounded... youthful indeed.

    [–]UltraPoss 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    Everything was good up until you brought this rape culture argument using comparisons with other countries you probably never lived in and that you can't even figure on a map. You sound frustrated a bit, the red pill is not about feeling hatred for women or any other kind of community, the red pill is about making you a better man in general and in your interaction with women in particular.

    [–]southLDNlad[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    You can think what you want :) I have no hatred at all towards women. Do you honestly believe that there is no issue with sexual abuse in the countries I named? And seriously, ad hominem? Try to be logical at least.

    [–]UltraPoss -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

    You say yourself that "this is found within any muslim state that enforces the teaching of Koran" well that's completely and utterly false because as someone who has been living almost all his life in three different muslim countries, i saw it from the inside and can only disagree with you. Rape is not socially acceptable within any muslim state. There are muslim countries where people would beat you up if they knew you raped someone. I am not saying it's good, but see, it's 100% opposed to what you think. If there are such countries, then why would other muslim countries be any different ? Don't forget, there is the Quran, Islam and all the ideologies that revolve around that, but there are also people behind this, and all sane human beings no matter what they believe in know deep inside that rape (and other things like that) is absurd. By the way, i criticized the fact that you brought up islam in a discussion where it doesn't even have to be. It smells hatred, feels hatred , looks hatred. I am telling you that and i'm 100% against islamic and all religious ideologies myself.

    [–]Bear-With-Bit 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    If you can imagine a irreverent comedian doing a bit on the so-called rape culture:

    "So I was raping this chick on my way to work this morning..."

    If rape was as rampant as some parts of our culture say it is, then we would have to separate the genders. Male and female high schools, colleges, dorms, even separate offices in the work place. Instead of 'teaching boys not to rape' we would have a movement to separate. It's all sham display to control the narrative and to sound superior. Look deeper into their message and you will only find noise, not reason.

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

    [removed]

    [–][deleted]  (3 children)

    [deleted]

    [–]southLDNlad[S] -1 points0 points  (2 children)

    This hadith provides the context for the Quranic verse (4:24):

    The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain.  They met their enemy and fought with them.  They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him)were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers.  So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Qur’anic verse: (Sura 4:24) "And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess." (Abu Dawud 2150, also Muslim 3433)

    Actually, as the hadith indicates, it wasn't Muhammad, but "Allah the Exalted" who told the men to rape the women in front of their husbands - which is all the more reason to think of Islam as being very different from other religions.

    Note also that the husbands of these unfortunate victims were obviously alive after battle.  This is important because it flatly contradicts those apologists who like to argue that the women Muhammad enslaved were widowed and thus unable to fend for themselves.  (Even if the apologists were right, what sort of a moral code is it that forces a widow to choose between being raped and starving?) 

    There are several other episodes in which Muhammad is offered the clear opportunity to disavow raping women - yet he instead offers advice on how to proceed.  In one case, his men were reluctant to devalue their female commodities for future resale by getting them pregnant.  Muhammad was asked about coitus interruptus in particular:

    "O Allah's Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?"  The Prophet said, "Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it. No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence.”(Bukhari 34:432)

    As indicated, the prophet of Islam did not mind his men raping the women, provided they ejaculated within the bodies of their victims.

    As one might imagine, Muhammad's obvious approval of raping women captured in battle (and his own personal participation, as recorded in many places) is of intense inconvenience to the Muslim apologists of our time.  For this reason, some of them attempt to explain away these many episodes and Quranic references to sex with captives by pretending that these are cases in which women have fled bad marriages and sought refuge with the Muslims.  Some apologists even refer to them as "wives," even though the Quran makes a clear distinction between "those whom thy right hand possesses" and true wives (see Sura 33:50).

    Beyond the desperation of the 21st century apologist however, there is absolutely nothing in the historical text to support this rosy revision of Muslim history.  The women of the Banu Mustaliq, for example, were sold into slavery following their rape:

    "We went out with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi'l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing 'azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah's Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter" (Sahih Muslim 3371)

    In fact, female slaves were traded like any other simple commodity by Muhammad and his band of devoted followers:

    "Then the apostle sent Sa-d b. Zayd al-Ansari, brother of Abdu'l-Ashal with some of the captive women of Banu Qurayza to Najd and he sold them for horses and weapons."(Ibn Ishaq/Hisham/Hisham 693)

    Is it Islamic to sell one's wife for horses?  Clearly these were not wives!

    Also, by definition, a "captured" woman is not one who is fleeing her husband.  She is fleeing her captor (ie. the Muslim slave raider).  This hadith describes a typical raid, in which the women and children are captured as they are attempting to flee the attacking Muslims:

    “…and then we attacked from all sides and reached their watering-place where a battle was fought.  Some of the enemies were killed and some were taken prisoners.  I saw a group of persons that consisted of women and children [escaping in the distance].  I was afraid lest they should reach the mountain before me, so I shot an arrow between them and the mountain.  When they saw the arrow, they stopped.  So I brought them, driving them along” (Sahih Muslim 4345)

    The Muslim narrator sees the women trying to escape (following the massacre of their men) and cuts off their route by shooting an arrow into their path.  These aren't women trying to seek refuge with the Muslims.  They are trying to avoid capture by the Muslims.

    The same hadith goes on to recount that Muhammad traded one of these captured women as a ransom to a different tribe.  The passage belies the fact that one intention of the captors was to have sex with their 'product':

    I drove them along until I brought them to Abu Bakr who bestowed that girl upon me as a prize.  So we arrived in Medina.  I had not yet disrobed her when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) met me in the street and said: “Give me that girl.”(Sahih Muslim 4345)

    [–]Chaddeus_Rex -1 points0 points  (0 children)

    To be fair though, nothing the Muslims in the Qu'ran did goes against the biology of humans or what was the standard practice of the time. As we on TRP know, women evolved to quickly adapt to their new environment when their old tribe was killed and this accounts for their solipsism and Briffault's Law.

    The Muslims defeated the enemy and took their wives as a prize - absolutely nothing wrong with that.

    [–]toasty99 -2 points-1 points  (10 children)

    As a lefty: none of us are afraid to criticize Islam. We just don’t like seeing anyone tortured or blown up by drones (without good reason). Lots of our grandfathers fought against some very bad dudes who targeted minorities, and we aren’t interested in propping up such a system, on either side.

    And fuck anyone who rapes a woman. To the extent that any religion condones this, fuck their religion too.

    [–]southLDNlad[S] 2 points3 points  (9 children)

    So fuck Islam? Also the left is hugely afraid to criticize Islam. You know Linda sarsour was a figurehead at the women's march? Have you heard of the Rotheram gang rapes that were covered up by police as they didn't want to be islamophobic for arresting Muslims? The list goes on...

    [–]Winterfuzz -1 points0 points  (5 children)

    Islam does not condone rape. There are rapists in every religion.

    [–]southLDNlad[S] 2 points3 points  (4 children)

    This hadith provides the context for the Quranic verse (4:24):

    The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain.  They met their enemy and fought with them.  They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him)were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers.  So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Qur’anic verse: (Sura 4:24) "And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess." (Abu Dawud 2150, also Muslim 3433)

    Actually, as the hadith indicates, it wasn't Muhammad, but "Allah the Exalted" who told the men to rape the women in front of their husbands - which is all the more reason to think of Islam as being very different from other religions.

    Note also that the husbands of these unfortunate victims were obviously alive after battle.  This is important because it flatly contradicts those apologists who like to argue that the women Muhammad enslaved were widowed and thus unable to fend for themselves.  (Even if the apologists were right, what sort of a moral code is it that forces a widow to choose between being raped and starving?) 

    There are several other episodes in which Muhammad is offered the clear opportunity to disavow raping women - yet he instead offers advice on how to proceed.  In one case, his men were reluctant to devalue their female commodities for future resale by getting them pregnant.  Muhammad was asked about coitus interruptus in particular:

    "O Allah's Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?"  The Prophet said, "Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it. No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence.”(Bukhari 34:432)

    As indicated, the prophet of Islam did not mind his men raping the women, provided they ejaculated within the bodies of their victims.

    As one might imagine, Muhammad's obvious approval of raping women captured in battle (and his own personal participation, as recorded in many places) is of intense inconvenience to the Muslim apologists of our time.  For this reason, some of them attempt to explain away these many episodes and Quranic references to sex with captives by pretending that these are cases in which women have fled bad marriages and sought refuge with the Muslims.  Some apologists even refer to them as "wives," even though the Quran makes a clear distinction between "those whom thy right hand possesses" and true wives (see Sura 33:50).

    Beyond the desperation of the 21st century apologist however, there is absolutely nothing in the historical text to support this rosy revision of Muslim history.  The women of the Banu Mustaliq, for example, were sold into slavery following their rape:

    "We went out with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi'l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing 'azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah's Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter" (Sahih Muslim 3371)

    In fact, female slaves were traded like any other simple commodity by Muhammad and his band of devoted followers:

    "Then the apostle sent Sa-d b. Zayd al-Ansari, brother of Abdu'l-Ashal with some of the captive women of Banu Qurayza to Najd and he sold them for horses and weapons."(Ibn Ishaq/Hisham/Hisham 693)

    Is it Islamic to sell one's wife for horses?  Clearly these were not wives!

    Also, by definition, a "captured" woman is not one who is fleeing her husband.  She is fleeing her captor (ie. the Muslim slave raider).  This hadith describes a typical raid, in which the women and children are captured as they are attempting to flee the attacking Muslims:

    “…and then we attacked from all sides and reached their watering-place where a battle was fought.  Some of the enemies were killed and some were taken prisoners.  I saw a group of persons that consisted of women and children [escaping in the distance].  I was afraid lest they should reach the mountain before me, so I shot an arrow between them and the mountain.  When they saw the arrow, they stopped.  So I brought them, driving them along” (Sahih Muslim 4345)

    The Muslim narrator sees the women trying to escape (following the massacre of their men) and cuts off their route by shooting an arrow into their path.  These aren't women trying to seek refuge with the Muslims.  They are trying to avoid capture by the Muslims.

    The same hadith goes on to recount that Muhammad traded one of these captured women as a ransom to a different tribe.  The passage belies the fact that one intention of the captors was to have sex with their 'product':

    I drove them along until I brought them to Abu Bakr who bestowed that girl upon me as a prize.  So we arrived in Medina.  I had not yet disrobed her when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) met me in the street and said: “Give me that girl.”(Sahih Muslim 4345)

    [–]tilnewstuff 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Your copy/paste arguments are not convincing. It is clear you have no clue what you're talking about when discussing the issue of other religions and cultures. You hurt your original post (which has some valid points) with these weak posts.

    As soon as you stepped into the "X has a rape culture but not us", your post deteriorated irreversibly. Try to to be more focused next time. Just focus on the issue at hand without the "OTHERS ARE EVIL AND WE ARE THE VICTIMS!" nonsense.

    [–]Winterfuzz -2 points-1 points  (2 children)

    This is a case of confirmation bias.

    You need to read it in a bigger context.

    I’m not here to argue with you because neither you or I will change our minds. I’m a Muslim and I’d never rape anyone, and this is not what I was taught. During the crusades, Christian men raped hundreds of women in their conquest. Every religion has bad people.

    [–]southLDNlad[S] 4 points5 points  (1 child)

    But the Bible never condones rape anywhere to my knowledge. That's the difference. That's the difference between bad practitioners of a religion, and a bad religion.

    [–]Winterfuzz -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

    Like I said. Islam doesn’t condone rape, you’re reading it out of context and a bad translation.

    [–]toasty99 -1 points0 points  (2 children)

    You are painting with a pretty broad brush, dude. The KKK is supposedly Christian, as was MLK, Jr. Pretty different beliefs between the two, right? I’ll say fuck the KKK, but MLK was a good guy. Just like I’ll say my Muslim neighbor who adores his daughters and invites me to his celebratory meals is a good dude, but the Pakistani judge who sentences a raped woman to be executed for adultery can eat shit.

    [–]southLDNlad[S] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

    I would say fuck the religion. Whilst there are 'good' muslims, just like there are good and bad christians, the religion itself is toxic. Just because people choose not to follow a religion literally or to the letter, does not mean the religion is good. When people are actively not following the instructions of their Holy Book in order to be morally good, it makes you wonder. This applies to all religions regardless of ideology. If they preach evil things, the religion is evil.

    Have a read of this.

    The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain.  They met their enemy and fought with them.  They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him)were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers.  So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Qur’anic verse: (Sura 4:24) "And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess." (Abu Dawud 2150, also Muslim 3433)

    Actually, as the hadith indicates, it wasn't Muhammad, but "Allah the Exalted" who told the men to rape the women in front of their husbands - which is all the more reason to think of Islam as being very different from other religions.

    Note also that the husbands of these unfortunate victims were obviously alive after battle.  This is important because it flatly contradicts those apologists who like to argue that the women Muhammad enslaved were widowed and thus unable to fend for themselves.  (Even if the apologists were right, what sort of a moral code is it that forces a widow to choose between being raped and starving?) 

    There are several other episodes in which Muhammad is offered the clear opportunity to disavow raping women - yet he instead offers advice on how to proceed.  In one case, his men were reluctant to devalue their female commodities for future resale by getting them pregnant.  Muhammad was asked about coitus interruptus in particular:

    "O Allah's Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?"  The Prophet said, "Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it. No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence.”(Bukhari 34:432)

    As indicated, the prophet of Islam did not mind his men raping the women, provided they ejaculated within the bodies of their victims.

    As one might imagine, Muhammad's obvious approval of raping women captured in battle (and his own personal participation, as recorded in many places) is of intense inconvenience to the Muslim apologists of our time.  For this reason, some of them attempt to explain away these many episodes and Quranic references to sex with captives by pretending that these are cases in which women have fled bad marriages and sought refuge with the Muslims.  Some apologists even refer to them as "wives," even though the Quran makes a clear distinction between "those whom thy right hand possesses" and true wives (see Sura 33:50).

    Beyond the desperation of the 21st century apologist however, there is absolutely nothing in the historical text to support this rosy revision of Muslim history.  The women of the Banu Mustaliq, for example, were sold into slavery following their rape:

    "We went out with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi'l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing 'azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah's Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter" (Sahih Muslim 3371)

    In fact, female slaves were traded like any other simple commodity by Muhammad and his band of devoted followers:

    "Then the apostle sent Sa-d b. Zayd al-Ansari, brother of Abdu'l-Ashal with some of the captive women of Banu Qurayza to Najd and he sold them for horses and weapons."(Ibn Ishaq/Hisham/Hisham 693)

    Is it Islamic to sell one's wife for horses?  Clearly these were not wives!

    Also, by definition, a "captured" woman is not one who is fleeing her husband.  She is fleeing her captor (ie. the Muslim slave raider).  This hadith describes a typical raid, in which the women and children are captured as they are attempting to flee the attacking Muslims:

    “…and then we attacked from all sides and reached their watering-place where a battle was fought.  Some of the enemies were killed and some were taken prisoners.  I saw a group of persons that consisted of women and children [escaping in the distance].  I was afraid lest they should reach the mountain before me, so I shot an arrow between them and the mountain.  When they saw the arrow, they stopped.  So I brought them, driving them along” (Sahih Muslim 4345)

    The Muslim narrator sees the women trying to escape (following the massacre of their men) and cuts off their route by shooting an arrow into their path.  These aren't women trying to seek refuge with the Muslims.  They are trying to avoid capture by the Muslims.

    The same hadith goes on to recount that Muhammad traded one of these captured women as a ransom to a different tribe.  The passage belies the fact that one intention of the captors was to have sex with their 'product':

    I drove them along until I brought them to Abu Bakr who bestowed that girl upon me as a prize.  So we arrived in Medina.  I had not yet disrobed her when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) met me in the street and said: “Give me that girl.”(Sahih Muslim 4345)

    [–]toasty99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    You are clearly very well versed in the subject ! I would say you make a valid point re: the violence inherent in Islamic texts. As you spoke to, the Old Testament is also pretty nasty. Admittedly, for a vulnerable reader, it’s a short distance from these holy books to explosives, or to violence against women.

    That said, we can’t just give up on all religious people - that’s most of the world! Religious people have a tendency to cherry-pick the nice parts of their religions anyway. So to the extent that we are saying “fuck Islam”, I think leaving out “fuck Christianity” or “fuck the Abrahamic religions” seems a bit like special pleading.

    Just saying.

    [–]2Dmva100 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

    We must question all Islamist men and women on terrorism because it's good for diversity and for feminism

    [–]RedPillAlphaBigCock -1 points0 points  (1 child)

    [–]Fedor_Gavnyukov -1 points0 points  (0 children)

    that was actually a funny film