/lit/ - Literature

Yeah, but only when men are involved and it is hot.

I support the rape of the woman who wrote that blog.

I disagree with a lot of that (although I respect the viewpoint and I appreciate, to some extent, the ideological consistency involved). However, I think the important thing to keep in mind here is that these are one person's views, that they are honestly held, that they are neither evil nor insane. People can reasonably disagree about the nature of sexuality and the proper ethics of sexual relationships. This thread doesn't have to descend into FEMINISTS ARE EVIL I HATE WOMEN, please please please.

Obviously, everyone reading this is going to disagree with this woman's views. Can we for god's sake keep this discussion reasonable instead of turning it into a woman hating boy's club?

>>1785771

Wait a minute. You say that every single person reading it is going to disagree. Yet she is not insane? She's pretty clearly irrational and wholly unaware of her irrationality, so I'd say she's pretty crazy.

>>1785771

>that they are neither evil nor insane

>You are a rape-supporter if you've been to a stripclub

Really? Come on, this woman uses something like rape to justify her ridiculous beliefs. She should get raped like all feminists to see what rape is actually about.

http://evebitfirst.wordpress.com/2010/10/07/a-rant/

>Dear men:

>Die.

>No, seriously. This is a rant, and it’s about you, personally. You, personally, are a shit, because statistics indicate there is an almost 100% certainty that you have either committed a rape, or wanted to commit a rape, or knowingly assisted or defended someone who committed a rape, or mocked a woman who was raped.

Pretty sure that it's a troll blog. If you want actual pants-on-head retarded feminists check out Feminist Philosophers.

that is grade-A retarded

>>1785761
So essentially, if you're a man you support rape.

>>1785779
Sorry, I meant that every single person on 4chan is going to disagree. Ignoring everything else, someone who is against pornography is not going to be popular on here. Is she 'irrational'? I don't think so. I think her views are perfectly rational, although I disagree with them. Again, reasonably people can disagree.

>>1785782
I disagree with her but wishing for anyone to get raped pretty much makes you the ridiculous one in any argument bro

reminds me of that whore victoria derbyshire screwing humiliating the british (very slightly demented) justice secretary ken clarke.

He was trying to explain that different kinds of rape call for different sentences, for example aggravated sex where a nice is held to the girls throat deserves a harsher punishment than a 17 year old having sex with his 15 year old girlfriend.

She maintained her absurd and deliberately convoluted position and said 'Rape is rape', to which he replied 'no it's not'. He's probably going to lose his seat in the cabinet now.

not that I support the tories I just resent cheap journalistic traps being used against an old guy who is glaringly out of touch with the overtly reactionary institution of modern feminism. poor kenny.

>>1785787
Oh and if you're a woman a man's raped you.

>>1785790
you know damn well this thread has no potential for evolving into a reasonable discussion. you might as well go try to get a feminist book club started at an odd future show

>A man is a rapist if:
>*He is anti-abortion.
>*He is pro-”choice”

We have a conundrum.

>>1785792
>where a nice
wtf am I reading?

But seriously, Ken Clarke is an idiot. I hope he has to resign just to piss the Tories off.

>>1785790
>Again, reasonably people can disagree.

No. Half the shit on that list is COMPLETELY irrelevant to rape. There is absolutely no way you can draw a line of causation between discussing pornography in terms of freedom of speech, and raping people.

It's not an issue of opinion. She states a proposition. Does not even attempt to argue for it. And there is no way to argue for it. It is false, and if you believe otherwise you are wrong. And no we can't "agree to disagree" on that.

>>1785799
>Roger Rabbit
A conundrum indeed...

>>1785799
are you literally a moron

># He is pro-”choice” because he believes abortion access will make women more sexually available.

also,
>feminist philosophy
>The privileging of solid over fluid mechanics, and indeed the inability of science to deal with turbulent flow at all, she attributes to the association of fluidity with femininity. Whereas men have sex organs that protrude and become rigid, women have openings that leak menstrual blood and vaginal fluids... From this perspective it is no wonder that science has not been able to arrive at a successful model for turbulence. The problem of turbulent flow cannot be solved because the conceptions of fluids (and of women) have been formulated so as necessarily to leave unarticulated remainders.
>e=mc2 is a sexed equation because it privileges the speed of light over other speeds vitality necessary to us."
-Luce Irigaray, an esteemed feminist philosopher.

>>1785809

I was waiting for that one to be posted...

>>1785807
>are you literally a moron

well good thing I'm not figuratively a moron

>>1785800

sorry i promise i'll got to bed after this post

>>1785811

i know i've posted it before but that was like last week and this time it's relevant.

>>1785803
There's certainly an argument for it if you attempt to look at the causes of rape instead of the act itself. The argument goes - and it's an argument that I have some sympathy for - that the objectification of women and the commodification of women inherent in pornography forms a part of the cultural worldview which leads to the attitude which causes rape. It's hardly an absurd argument, it's not an insane argument. Is there a statistical causation? Almost certainly not - for one thing it would be almost impossible to prove. But the argument that there's a connection between the existence and acceptance of pornography and the kind of culture which engenders rape does not seem prima facie ludicrous.

Even if I, again, do disagree with it.

>He defends the physical abuse of women on the grounds of “consent.”

I...I just don't even...

>Feminism: women and men must act the way I tell them to!

Oh wait, that's fascism.

>>1785790
Her views are not rational. Not because I personally disagree with them, but because it's not possible that even a majority of men are rapists.
If they are, why aren't women defending themselves? Technology is the great equalizer of our times. Why not shoot the bastard? Why not electrocute him? Women have won many equal rights, they can defend themselves just as well as men can.

>>1785825
so you think that there's no relation between on the one hand violence in sex - the desire to be violent to and controlling towards your partner - and on the other hand violent, non-consenting sex? you think that the impulse that leads to the one is COMPLETELY UNRELATED TO the impulse that leads to the other?

>>1785824
>does not seem prima facie ludicrous.

Yes it does. It's like the "violence in movies results in violent people", but without the "violence in movies" part. Pornography does not depict rape. Unless you argue that all descriptions and depictions of sexual activity make men into rapists (which is a completely ridiculous position to hold), there is no connection whatsoever.

>>1785839
>Pornography does not depict rape

sometimes it does lil homie

Well by that definition I have been raped by a number of different women, who all knew I was high when they had sex with me, even thought they were sober.

Lock the Rapist bitches up and throw away the key.

>>1785834

Even if there is a connection, that does not make men who "defend the physical abuse of women on the grounds of consent" rape supporters. Seriously, if a lady is into S&M and I oblige her, THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ME SUPPORTING RAPE. NOTHING. Her argument is that even if women consent, they can be raped. Which is an analytically false statement.

>>1785834
this here is an example of dark-aged, Evangelical thinking.

It's exactly the same as saying: thinking about committing a sin is as bad as committing the sin itself.

It's a load of bullshit which was only thought up in order to ensure that everyone was in a constant state of sin, and therefore always in the Church's death grip to obtain salvation.

Advocating a feminist thought-police dogma is only going to make you sound crazy. All but the most penitent sects of Christianity have done away with that kind of thinking, and if it didn't work out for most of fucking Christianity, what makes you think it will work for feminism?

the majority of this list is eminently reasonable but having sex high fucking rules so hopefully the author would make an exception for consenting partners who also consent to blow it down beforehand?

She actually says some non-entirely insane (but still spectacularly one-sided) things in the comments below. The 'rape-supporter' thing is just an attention grabber/trollbait. If she really does think that patriarchal society as a whole legitimises rape, the logical thing to do next would be 'A woman is a rape-supporter if...'- I wonder if she has the guts to do that?

>He has procured a prostitute.
Its not the man fault if they do something they dont want for the money. A man cant expect that the prostitute hate it and is doing exatcly it only because they money. In fact they can expect that, but its the prostitute fault if she do that, there are many homless girls that would not do porn or those things if asked.

>He characterizes prostitution as a “legitimate” “job” “choice” or defends men who purchase prostitutes.
Prostituion is prostituion, it can be a job, or be made for fun, it can be a choice, made for money or because the pimp said he would kill her if she not done prostituion.

>He has gone to a strip club.
the womans are there because they want. if they dont want leave.

>He is anti-abortion.
Some say they are anti-abortion because abortion is killing a life.

>He watches any pornography in which sexual acts are depicted as a struggle for power or domination, regardless of whether women are present.
porn is a movie and its fiction, using your logic all horror movies fans are serial killers

>He watches pornography in which women are depicted.
So, if he wateches porn with males he is not a rape suporter?? So only females can be raped??

>He supports sexual “liberation” and claims women would have more sex with (more) men if society did not “inhibit” them.
sexual liberation doenst means rape, In this case the woman would be willing to do it

>He promotes the idea that women as a class are happier or more fulfilled if they have children, or that they “should” have children.
Nothing to do with rape. Most of the persons that do it are female ones. If some male man is stupid enought to use this "get a kid now" talk or to have some sort prejudice against adults without a children he is totally stupid

I think someone needs a

"A woman is asking for it if" list as a rebuttal to all this bs.

>>1785916
what a bad post in multiple respects. i mean just on a technical level.

she just needs a good dicking, then maybe she'll stop PMSing all over the internet.

>>1785771
I oppose porn, prostitution, and strip clubs on feminist grounds, but the blogger in question is a fucking retard and should be mocked mercilessly. This insistence by other feminists that I respect any braindead opinion if it happens to be mouthed by a minority is maddening. Do some men not "honestly hold" the belief that "feminists are evil"? Do you RESPECT THEIR VIEWPOINT AND APPRECIATE THE IDEOLOGICAL CONSISTENCY INVOLVED there too, or are you just a spineless hypocrite with no ideological consistency of your own?

>>1785847
She's not saying that the consensual sex IS rape, she's saying it's part of a broader culture that justifies the objectification of women and thus legitimises rape. The words 'rape supporter' grab your attention like they're supposed to, but she doesn't mean conscious approval of rape- as she says at the beginning, it's aimed at people who would never say they 'support rape'.

It is a very extreme argument, but that makes it kinda fun, actually. I want to see her write a book called

>Society: One Big Rape Machine?

>>1785916
its so clear that the woman who wrote that article was just trying to make us angry, in other words trolling all men. Derp if you are both drunk its rape derp. Wtf? Obvious troll is obvious,She is obviously a troll who finds it funny to anger men and she is starting a troll war between the sexes.

>>1785942

>This insistence by other feminists that I respect any braindead opinion if it happens to be mouthed by a minority is maddening.

feels strawman man

>>1785952
It's kind of trolling (actually more attention-grabbing), but she's not saying that everything in the list IS rape.

>>1785945

It still has nothing to do with supporting rape.

>>1785959
its trolling.

why is this thread so buttmad? 4chan is supposed to get a kick out of logically sloppy troll moral reasoning. oh wait, someone tried to make you feel bad for watching porn, that's beyond the pale

>>1785964
trolling is fine when the target audience is aware its a troll and its not inciting hatred between groups.

Black vs white trolling is pretty bad out of context too.

the woman who posted it is actually a lesbian. that explains a lot.

>"This is a handy guide for women who involve themselves with men"

yeah, "those" types lol.

if you're gonna try and troll you better step up your game next time bitches.

This woman is not a real feminist. If she had read "Intercourse" by Andrea Dworkin, she would understand that the systemic inequality between men and women makes anything resembling "consent" impossible. Thus, all sexual intercourse is rape, and the only way for women to avoid being raped is to avoid it altogether. By not following this line of reasoning, "Eve's Daughter" proves herself as a loud-shouting deviationist puppet of the patriarchy.

>>1785962
That guy here. Yeah, the 'rape' bit is the tricky bit. I can buy the idea that many elements in modern society encourage the objectification of women- porn, and advertising that looks kinda porny, being obvious ones. She'd presumably link S&M to this- if the man's the dom, it's a fetishization of power relations. So- and I'm guessing here- if she's being consistent she'd say that both you and the woman are maintaining the patriarchy. You'd presumably answer that the sex is entirely separate from the way you treat women normally, to which she'd say 'Nuh-uh! It all matters!' Or something.

>>1786003

...still nothing to do with rape. Sexism and patriarchy are not rape.

>>1786003
...but the biggest problem is patriarchy=rape. Even more so with something like this >>1786000. Doesn't that sort of... belittle actual real rape? If everything in society legitimises/supports rape, then where does that leave an actual real rapist's responsibility for his crime? Is it even a crime anymore?

>>1786003
My fetish is actually for the women being the domme, so the fetishizisation of the power relation is in the feminists favor. Troll loses lol

>>1786012
are you trying to say that women who have a "rape fetish" should be banned from playing it out? Hardly very liberating to tell women what they can and cant do in the bedroom is it?

>>1786015
you get off on it because it's wrong and women aren't supposed to have power

>>1786008
Agreed, see below.
>>1786015
Ask her, she might have a crazy way round that (maybe to do with the medieval festivals where the peasants acted like lords and vice versa for one day a year? Reinforcing more than undermining the real power structure...)
On the other hand, she might be down for that shit. And if you're looking to get punished by a woman... well, seems like she's got a lot of punishment to give.

>mfw I just realised that you can undermine militant feminists by visualising them as leather-clad dommes

>>1786026
nope, i just like my gf to be in control.

>>1786023 here

still havent answered me

I'm a woman and find this offensive. She's the type of woman who feels a girl can do no wrong and all men are pigs and defines everything as rape.

Porn is not rape. Paying a girl who willingly accepts for sex is not rape. This broad is a tard, nuff said.

>>1786023
I'm imagining her arguments for fun... I can't see her hanging out here, somehow. But yeah, I imagine it's possible she would say that. It'd be pretty inconsistent to claim that women have no role in reinforcing the patriarchy, wouldn't it?

Think of anarchists. They believe in freedom from all organisations, but to achieve their goals some of them have a habit of forming highly disciplined revolutionary gangs, right? Maybe after the revolution, the completely liberated women can enjoy all the rape fantasies they like...

So I'm simultaneously gay, a supporter of women's rights, and a rape-supporter?

That list is so stupid I couldn't even finish half of it.

>>1786042
shes a lesbian, she would prefer if all women hated men so she'd have more to herself. admirable intelligence really. Im not mad, im kind of impressed.

>>1786042
>>1786045
Her actual argument isn't in the list- it's her answer to the last comment. Again, it's crazy extreme, but it is thought-provoking.

"Some people are responding to this and saying, “No, this can’t be right, because then almost every man would support rape!” To which I respond: Yep, got it in one, because PATRIARCHAL SOCIETY supports rape. The concepts of masculinity and femininity, the treatment of women, the systems of hierarchies of power and domination, all depend on support of rape. If you support those ideas, you support rape."

DERRRRRRPP

Women are in control. They just make men think otherwise.

>>1786077

hmm yes they are just getting paid less for the same jobs as a clever feint

opinions aside, i don't know how she expects anyone to take this seriously when she doesn't justify her positions.

>>1786083
wiley foxes indeed!

>>1786083
hmm yes but they don't work as hard.

>>1786061
Yeah, I'm the dude who's kind-of slightly being her advocate here, and I can't see that as anything less than nuts. She could say something like 'rape is an extreme but logical manifestation of the power hierarchy, so you can't seriously oppose rape if you don't challenge the hierarchy', but... no. Apparently rape is everything.

Is she just trying to troll? If so, great job. If not, does she not realize that half of those lists are demeaning to WOMEN in the sense that she's basically saying even if a woman has free choice and willingly wants to do something that they are still being 'raped' because they are a woman?

Also, half the shit she mentions applies to women too. I've slept with someone high. Did I rape him? Guess so.

I guess paying for a girl's dinner is rape too.

>>1786100
...and there's an obvious danger with that. She's trying to shock you by making you equate the hierarchy with something as horrible as rape. But you might go the opposite way- rape might start looking pretty damn normal.

What pisses me off is that women read this sort of shit, whether it's serious or not, and it works them up and warps their idea of what rape really is. Before anyone brings it up, I'm not saying women are mentally inferior and will fall for this while a man won't, just saying that the main demographic of that blog is women, that some people are stupid, that women are people, and that some women are stupid.

So they read this and it warps their idea of rape, then they accuse some guy of rape down the line when it was anything but. It pisses me off because firstly the guy's reputation could be ruined no matter the outcome of the trial, and secondly because it helps to de-legitimize cases of actual rape.

If you contribute to making everything into rape, you're also contributing to making actual rape trivial.

>>1786116
>>1786119
Normalisingrapemind.

athreadoftrolls.png

This is why men can't date women anymore with out being scared of a woman screaming 'RAPE!' at every damn thing.

>>1786119

pretty sure false rape accusations aren't anywhere near as common as you think

I'm a woman and apparently I'm also a rape-supporter. Imagine that.

>>1786061
>>1786061

She missed out the fact that evolution and biology support rape too. Giving men a penis and making them stronger and all... biology is a rapist!

>>1786146
rape fantasy. you disgust members of your own sex.

I think all men should have to wear old fashion metal boxers with a lock and key. That would stop them raping anyone.

>>1786151

Hey, they teach biology in school... LEARNING SUPPORTS RAPE!

Wow, me and my girlfriends have done more than half the stuff listed here. Guess we're rapists too.

>>1786156

Yeah, but it can't stop our support of it.

>He characterizes prostitution as a “legitimate” “job” “choice” or defends men who purchase prostitutes.

Whitman confirmed for rape-supporter.

woodies support rape

any man who gets a woodie is a rapist

This article is hilarious in that is purports that women are so fragile and in need of protection that men should act on the behaviors of other men, in case it harmed the woman.

This is why nobody takes feminism seriously,least of all most women

"Eve bit first, adam got the pit"
I had no idea Apples were a pitted fruit.
But apparently that is where the strength to dominate the everlovin shit out of women came from,

"■He has ever sexually engaged with any woman while she was underage, drunk, high, physically restrained, unconscious, or subjected to psychological, physical, economic, or emotional coercion."
So men are responsible for the hormonal shit women have going on internally also?
Not very flattering scenaro ladies.

off topic but how many men would actually mind getting raped by a hot woman btw? cause I wouldnt

>>1786186
That's what I was thinking...

"Sir, you raped her."
"But she was happy and said yes! SHE CONSENTED!"
"Sir, she was under emotional stress. She didn't know what she was saying"

>>1786181

If it weren't for Eve, we would be having celestial orgies!

>>1786154
Can I still be a rape-fantasizer if I only have sex with other women, though? Or is it only rape if it's a man sexually objectifying lesbians or lesbian activity? Also, does a burlesque joint count as a "strip club"?

>>1786181

core, pit... kindly quit reifying the patriarchy with your pedantic hairsplitting

>>1786190
What if it's Jessica Alba violating your ass with a plugged-in curling iron

>>1786186
Im surprised he hasnt included mentally or physically handicapped people as well. They cant have sex because its automatically rape.

>>1786202
>>1786202
lol I dont see how that's equivalent. Have you ever seen a dick thats over 100c?

Mein gott, this woman is a complete fascist.

>>1786202
>>1786202
raging faggot detected

post this on /b/ and watch the shitstorm lol

>He has ever sexually engaged with any woman while she was...physically restrained
>He defends the physical abuse of women on the grounds of “consent.”
Wait, so like BDSM? If a woman tells a guy to tie her up and hit her and he does, he's a rapist? Implying that a woman can't think for herself or shouldn't engage in the kind of sexual activity she prefers.
>He supports sexual “liberation” and claims women would have more sex with (more) men if society did not “inhibit” them.
Implying that society SHOULD inhibit women's sexual activity or that women don't have sexual desires to inhibit or that men shouldn't want to have sex with sexually uninhibited women. Take your pick.
>He defends the sexualization or sexual abuse of minor females on the grounds of “consent” or “willingness.”
Implying that women under a certain age do not desire or pursue sexual activity.
>He defends these actions by saying that some women also engage in them.
i.e. men are always in the wrong, women never are.

I find this list thoroughly insulting. It implies that women cannot think for themselves in terms of their own sexuality and that men should decline all sexual invitations that any feeble-minded, emotionally-driven female might regret later. "Sorry hun. I know that it's our anniversary and that you wore that lingerie specifically so that we could have sex, but we were drinking some wine earlier during supper and I don't want to inadvertently rape you." Fuck that.

>>1786314
Again, I'm going to be devil's advocate here: she does not say that this behaviour IS rape. There's a lot of problems with her ideas, but that is just not something she claims.

>>1786336
repe supporters same thing

>>1786083

Controlling for experience, position, education, family status, etc. women earn 8% more than men. Far fewer women than men are unemployed, and the disparity in degrees is just shocking.

http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,2015274,00.html

>>1786343
WROOOOOOOOOOONG.

>>1786354

>this reverse gender gap, as it's known, applies only to unmarried, childless women under 30 who live in cities.

soooo disingenuous argument or you didn't scroll past the first paragraph?

>>1786213
>>1786262
I think that he's just pointing out that rape can employ the use of foreign and potentially damaging objects. A lot of rapists are sick fucks who want to mutilate as well as humiliate their victims. Sometimes the consequences of rape isn't just "will this get me pregnant?" or "will I get an STD?" Sometimes it's "will I live to see tomorrow?" or "will I ever recover to the point where I can have sex again or have children?"

That blog is merely calling things the way that the author sees it and unless you yourself are a part of the group that is victimized by this then you are posting from a place of privilege.

This is a fact.

>>1786402
I am a woman and I posted this >>1786314

Also, as a lesbian, I'm of double minority status. I can honestly say, without speaking from a position of privilege, that while some of her claims are legitimate, a good deal of them are pure bullshit.

Inb4 "You've been brainwashed by the patriarchy."

>>1786402
Posting from a place of privilege does not make your opinion wrong or worthless.
Posting as a member of a victimised group does not make your opinion right or valuable.

These are also facts.

>This thread.

Wow. I would have never thought that /lit/ would be such a bastion of misogyny.

http://halloftheblackdragon.com/reel/1105/is-nerd-culture-the-embodiment-of-racist-and-sexist-attitu
des.html

Why is this kind of behavior acceptable?

>>1786471
because women ridicule "nerd culture" as un-masculine and undesirable?

Just a thought.

>>1786440
...women aren't in the minority.

>>1786479
what a willfully obtuse post

>>1786440
>>1786440
Hey, so I was one of the early defenders of the linked blog upthread

I still disagree with the positions in the blog - deeply disagree with in a lot of cases. I do think, though, that a lot of people on 4chan who are responding to it don't really 'get' the arguments that she's making and are willing to dismiss them offhand in a way that's not really justified.

I still think she's wrong and fundamentally disagree with her, but I also understand where she's coming from.

>>1786402
this is a real good post, the kind you don't see a lot on 4chan tbqh (even if i'm someone disagreeing with the linked blog from a position of privilege which i guess makes me the babby now)

>>1786471
Are you kidding? This is one of the calmest, most reasoned responses I've ever seen on 4chan. It's mostly just "lol bitches and hos"

>>1786483
I don't know what country you're in, but I'm going to doubt you're a minority with respect to being a woman.

>>1786504
bro come on you knew what she meant.

>>1786471
>>1786471
I think a lot of this depends on a misperception of 'nerd culture' and 'geekiness' and 'fandom' and what that entails. The thing is that 'nerdiness' is by no means monolithic and nerd culture has a huge variety of constituent elements - and, for some reason, nerd culture is also really strongly gendered. i think it's because nerd culture offered a route to an alternative concept of femininity - cf. Bucholz, "'Why Be Normal?': Language and Identity Practices in a Community of Nerd Girls" - "For girls, nerd identity also offers an alternative to the pressures of hegemonic femininity."

So I think that if you look solely at the male-oriented elements of nerd culture, particularly at the most visible and juvenile parts of it, yeah, it looks fairly sexist, because you're looking at young, uneducated, angry excluded males. It's not particularly surprising that this group is going to be rather sexist, frankly. It's a group you would expect to be sexist. But if you look at the more female oriented aspects of nerd culture - for instance at LJ - the picture is very different. And so I think the picture is rather more complicated than you're making it out to be.

Just some thoughts really.

>>1786506
That she's not allowed to vote?

>>1786531
imma ridicule you as masculine and un-desirable rite now

>>1786479
Any sociology class would tell you that the word "minority" refers to wealth and status as well as quantity of people. There are fewer women in positions of power, thus women qualify as a "minority."

I am, apparently, all about rape.

>>1786573
it's probably better to talk about 'women and minorities' as underprivileged or oppressed groups tbqh and use minorities to refer to groups that are minorities

>>1786484
Brofist! I, like, totally agree with you. Pretty cool feeling.

>>1786573
>Any sociology class would tell you that the word "minority" refers to wealth and status as well as quantity of people.
Yeah, not quite. It's lack of political force.

>>1786580
You can mock, but I'm not sure 4chan is the place to do it. Seriously, 4chan probably IS all about rape. It would certainly explain all the rapey stuff.

>>1786591
Agreed. Now can we all stop bickering over semantics like arrogant douchebags? Jesus Christ, /lit/...

>>1785761
># He watches pornography in which women are depicted.

Looks like I'm a rape supporter.
But wait, does this mean gay porno is okay?

>>1786829
>But wait, does this mean gay porno is okay?
Yes, because male on male rape is trivial and sometimes funny.

>He watches pornography in which women are depicted.

Wow.

This article is anti-feminist if anything. Feminism is about sexual liberation, not sexual repression. There are some valid points here, but the bits about prostitution and pornography are just crass. I would imagine that very many men have dangerous ideas of rape, especially if they think a woman is asking for it. Honestly, the feminist conception of rape is more focused on it as an act of violence, and not simply a sexual perversion as it seems to be depicted in this article. Hell of a troll, I mad.

If all men condone rape, then rape can't be that bad.

>>1786902
>Feminism is about sexual liberation, not sexual repression

Feminism isn't monolithic, some visions of feminism are deeply sexually liberating, others are deeply concerned about sex and power

>Honestly, the feminist conception of rape is more focused on it as an act of violence, and not simply a sexual perversion as it seems to be depicted in this article.

I think it's more complicated than that? Rape is an act of sexual violence - it's an act of violence, yes, but one that's directed against women and which is specifically sexual. So you can't divorce the sexual aspect, anymore than you can divorce the violent aspects or the domination aspects, from the act of rape. doe sthat make sense

"He watches pornography in which women are depicted."

As opposed to what, gay porn? This is the stupidest list I've ever seen because literally every man and most women will be caught on some point or another.

>>1786920
I think even the strands of feminism which are most concerned with the power dynamic (those which are opposed to pornography on the grounds that it is the location of much exploitation, for instance) are still ultimately concerned with sexual liberation--but yea, liberation is different to different people. As far as divorcing the sexual aspect of rape from its violent aspect, I don't think it is as problematic as you think. To think of rape as a sexual act diminishes the fact that it is truly an act of violence and domination. I don't think rapists do what they do simply for sexual gratification, do you?

Honestly, this list seems like it's probably meant more as a deployment in internecine Feminist wars than anything else.

Anyone trying to explain why someone might take a dim view of porn or view it as connected to rape on 4chan is a bigger existential hero than Sisyphus. (For the record, I don't agree with the author's position; I think the problems with porn (and they are there), if it's not misogynistic or otherwise power-oriented, come from people projecting bad ideas of human sexuality they got elsewhere onto neutral or positive content.)

>>1786929
>literally every man
Looks like you just got THE WHOLE POINT OF THE BLOG. See her comments below the list.
>most women
Now, this she does gloss over. She kind of admits that it's a logical conclusion in the comments, but I think she's avoiding it in the name of women's solidarity.

>>1786471
>critiquing radical feminism is the same as misogyny.
Ohyou.gif

>>1786944
I'd be interested to see how much porn isn't fairly obviously power-oriented. A lot of it certainly is.

>>1786573
>sociologist can't grasp 9th grade statistics
Once again proving how incredibly useless any class or degree in sociology is.

>>1786954
I'd say most if it is, from what I've seen (little) and heard. Or most of the video stuff is; I actually forget sometimes that when most people say "porn" they're thinking video. I'm thinking at first thought the erotic still images I see lurking any 4chan board.

My views are similar but not identical to Steinem's "Erotica vs. Pornography."

>>1786950
this article is not radical feminism, it is really kind of misogynistic, portraying women as nearly helpless victims of a constant sexual exploitation.

>He characterizes prostitution as a “legitimate” “job” “choice” or defends men who purchase prostitutes.

This one makes a sizable portion of feminists into rape supporters.

I've been raped and I think this is stupid as shit.

For anyone who didn't want to read the article (or couldn't stomach it until the end).

>>1786970
True- and she avoids this issue in the comments. It logically follows from her argument, so I don't think she'd deny it. But if you want her to actually come out and say that at least half of women are also 'rape supporters', I think someone needs to post that there as a woman. Doesn't really work when men do it.

>>1786968
I'm now confused about who you were initially calling misogynistic.

>>1786968
Wouldn't say it's misogynistic. Her argument doesn't depend on women being inherently weak- it's that thousands of years of culture are stacked against them. The objectification of women is hardwired into our society. That's pretty true.

>>1786932
I don't think they do it for sexual gratification. I do think that you can't ignore the sexual aspect of the act of rape. It's different from a mugging or a beating or an act of physical violence, it's an act of sexual violence directed towards specifically sexual organs and activities (and in the case of man-on-woman rape it's tied up with gender in a significant way). I definitely don't think it's about sexual GRATIFICATION but I do think it's about sex. And I think that's where a lot of her commentary on rape is coming from - it's something which is at the same time violent/dominating/power-hungry and sexual and gendered.

>>1786990
yes, but men are objectified as well. I don't deny that women have been exploited throughout history. The exploitation continues and is definitely encoded even in our language. I still think the article is trying too hard to be provocative and paints with a broad-brush. I think it contradicts many feminist concepts.

>>1787003
Again feminism is not monolithic, and it can contradict your conception of feminism while still being feminist

I disagree with a lot of what she's saying but it's still feminist

>>1786990
I think whether you think it's misogynistic or not depends on whether or not you agree with her as to the extent of enforced female weakness in the year 2011. It would be awfully misogynistic to overstate it, which I think she does. To categorically state that a woman can't freely or as freely as anyone consents to anything consent to certain sexual acts is either misogynistic or, for lack of a non-gendered term, misanthropic. Take your pick.

Skimming the comments suggests she wants to chuck the whole idea of consent as a standard for evaluating acts, which is problematic on basically every level imaginable.

>>1787009
Okay, that's fair. I suppose I just disagree with her concept of feminism. I think it's kind of counter-productive and feeds this misconception of feminists as anti-sex, paranoid and unforgiving.

>>1786997
I think a good way to look at the relationship of sex and rape is to look at rape as violence /against/ sex, /against/ sexuality as a positive, edifying, pleasurable thing. And obviously against other things- autonomy, physical security, all the obvious stuff.

>>1786980
Honestly having now read the comments she is right when she says that if they apply to women or not isn't really germane to the discussion. I disagree with her, but she's right that it's an attempt to steer the discussion away from the positions underpinning her post when someone takes the list and says "hey what about women." Particularly since for her to answer it would require a long discussion of the idea of being an unwitting supporter of a cultural system that facilitates rape (which she does touch on a bit in the post and the comments.)

If you hold with sex positive feminist beliefs you already believe that her opinion is flawed so rather than trying to derail the discussion onto another topic it really would be more proper to directly address her points. Or more correctly the logic underpinning them.

>>1787012
The problem I see with her denial of consent based on the surrounding cultural system is that if the effects of culture are taken so far as to even partially invalidate the reality of someone's consent then those same cultural conditions consequently at least partially remove culpability from a rapist for the exact same reasons. She's of course not arguing that tack, she's trying to provoke though by pointing out the cultural connection of dominance and sex (which by her logic is the ultimate reason for rape) with situations in which a man may have reaped some benefit from that aspect of culture.

>>1787033
This. She totally overlooks any autonomous agency. This is not a productive way of bringing about the practice of feminist theory.

I like GTA.

This means I hate all people and support mass murder.

>>1787017
>I think a good way to look at the relationship of sex and rape is to look at rape as violence /against/ sex, /against/ sexuality as a positive, edifying, pleasurable thing. And obviously against other things- autonomy, physical security, all the obvious stuff.

I think that defining rape as having any one ultimate motivation is to over simplify a complex issue. Rape, like murder, can happen for a variety of reasons from a heat of passion situation to a deliberate premeditated attack. If you don't recognize that then the idea of it still being rape if the rapist didn't know it was rape starts to fall apart (and there are certainly situations where someone can commit rape and not think of it as rape in their mind.)

Honestly, when I first read that (and especially her rant), I got pretty pissed off and offended, for lack of a better word.

But after calming down I do have to agree with her on some points.

The major problems I have are:
1. It seems as though, according to her, the only way to get rid of the "patriarchy" would be to either kill off all of the men, or make them all eunuchs.

2. She somewhat seems delusional and paranoid, especially in her "rant." (But maybe that's just the rage). Things, at least in the Western world, have improved for women, but everyone seems unable to acknowledge that.

3. Strictly limiting the focus of the discussion to sex/gender really fucks up our ability to see what is actually going on. I mean, women may be oppressed, but is a rich white woman really more oppressed than a poor man, of any race?

>>1787033
>The problem I see with her denial of consent based on the surrounding cultural system is that if the effects of culture are taken so far as to even partially invalidate the reality of someone's consent then those same cultural conditions consequently at least partially remove culpability from a rapist for the exact same reasons

Good fucking point.

>provoke thought
>with situations in which a man may have reaped some benefit from that aspect of culture.

It didn't read like a privilege list or anything like that to me. Quite a lot of them are things from which the man doesn't benefit (or lose) at all, but are just assholish or allegedly assholish things to say/think/do.

Like I said earlier ITT, it seemed like just another volley in the Feminist Wars, albeit one from a particularly weird and extreme sex-negative position. I mean, she even denies the concept of sexual needs altogether.

>>1787044
Yeah things have improved for women, which is why feminism must now attempt to dissect the patriarchal conventions of our society, hopefully with the result that both men and women are no longer oppressed by stifling gender roles.

>>1787044
Class divides us more than sex, gender, race, or creed and yet we cannot deal with the issue precisely because the lower classes are splintered and played against one another.

>>1787050
I totally agree with this, I think we must continue to expand our notions of the proletarian class (beginning with the works of Raoul Vanegeim for instance) until we achieve a cogent class identity (especially in the US) where, the rights of women, immigrants, the unemployed etc. etc. take center stage of policy as a matter of human rights.

>>1787012
>this article is not radical feminism, it is really kind of misogynistic, portraying women as nearly helpless victims of a constant sexual exploitation.
Honestly I think a good deal of radfem smacks of internalized misogyny. For example the glibly using rape as a rhetorical device kind of trivializes violence against women, no?

>>1787012
Guy you were replying to here: actually, yes, fair point. The whole idea of everything supporting rape does imply a much wider definition of rape which undermines the idea of consent... and that is problematic. Although that's not to say there isn't an argument for it- the whole autonomous decision-making human thing is always an abstraction...

>>1787048
>It didn't read like a privilege list or anything like that to me. Quite a lot of them are things from which the man doesn't benefit (or lose) at all, but are just assholish or allegedly assholish things to say/think/do.

To me it read like a privilege list written by someone who was either venting in a lot of anger or was trying to be intentionally provocative. Or both. Since the first is irrelevant to addressing her point, I left it along when discussing her intentions. I don't object to her argument based on tone, I object to it based on what I feel is a fundamental difference of opinion about some of the most basic assumptions she has to make for her argument to make sense.

>>1787041
True, but I think what I wrote is motivation-independent. Running over someone with your car is still, at the end of the day, violence against someone's life.

Or, look at it this way. A willing footsoldier in a genocide doesn't think of what he's doing as murder- but it is. I think most rapes are probably committed by people who don't think of what they did/do as rape, but their effects are just as damaging as someone who consciously sets out to rape a woman. That's why a cultural approach to this shit, not to defend the post linked in the OP, is so important. Rapes come from bad ideas floating around in the culture about sex and sexuality and women, the same way genocides come from bad ideas floating around in the culture about the victim ethnic group and perpetrator ethnic group.

>>1787055
Well some radical feminists (Dworkin) would agree with you and say that because there's these underlying social/cultural conditions it really is impossible to have consenting sex - thus all sex is rape.

>>1787059

>>1787053
Yes, the amorphous unoffensive and inclusive definition of "middle class" in the United States has long prevented effective organization and identification amongst the workers of the US. The inability to accept the existence of a class divide is a convenient social fiction that enables an incredible amount of exploitation to go by without protest.

>>1787060
sauce, issue, go go go

>>1787020
Fair point. It's just a bit glaring that her list finishes by addressing women, and she says further down that she writes for a female audience. You'd think therefore that the issue of female 'rape support' would be a very important one, but when a man (presumably) points this out in the comments she says that's not his business.

Also- "if a man considers my post to be a legitimate social critique, then it shouldn’t matter to him whether I, personally, would apply it to women". This is bad. Surely it CAN'T be a legitimate critique if it doesn't even address the role of women. Half of it is missing.

If someone considers all sexual acts as rape, then how do they reconcile sexual desire? Is all sexual desire the desire to rape then? Once again, I think the concept of rape as a sexual act, and not an act of violence, is counter-productive. It's not going to help.

>>1787055
Well then, like the other guy said, taking that tack would also absolve the rapist because he's doing it from the culture. Either there's moral responsibility and choice and consent/nonconsent or there isn't. You can and have to analyze the culture stuff down to the root, but at the top end of it all, we choose. Delegitimizing that goes nowhere good and smacks of an overly instrumental view of human beings. Which also goes nowhere good, and in a way is the very problem we're hitting up against.

>>1787056
>intentionally provocative

That's all it read as to me. A sincere, intentional provocation. Didn't really sound like a privilege list at all, though, but yeah, it's

>irrelevant to addressing her point, I left it along when discussing her intentions. I don't object to her argument based on tone, I object to it based on what I feel is a fundamental difference of opinion about some of the most basic assumptions she has to make for her argument to make sense.

I fully agree with all this.

>>1787058
>That's why a cultural approach to this shit, not to defend the post linked in the OP, is so important. Rapes come from bad ideas floating around in the culture about sex and sexuality and women, the same way genocides come from bad ideas floating around in the culture about the victim ethnic group and perpetrator ethnic group.

This is true, I think I was just looking at it from too specific of an angle compared to the more global angle your were taking in your post. If we're studying and discussing the specific crime of rape, dividing it based on personal motivation is necessary. If we're looking at the phenomenon of rape and the systematic cultural framework of which it is symptomatic then an abstraction to the most basic terms is necessary. In your case "violence against sexuality."

>>1787059
It's an argument that makes sense, but it's also an entirely useless argument. It's utterly incompatible with the human condition, and I don't even mostly mean in the biological sense, as are the logical analogs you could make about coercion, power imbalances, etc. and any form of social interaction.

It's an interesting theoretical argument to bat around in your head, but if you actually want to improve the human condition you can't just go rejecting the whole affair.

>>1787076
Agreed.

To sort of extend what I was saying, I think most rapes that occur are simply just assholes with an insufficient respect for women and conception of mutuality trying to get laid, to go back to the car analogy like someone who just drives through a crosswalk full of people without giving a fuck.

We all know her approach is flawed. Let's examine. She begins by writing:
>A man is a rape-supporter if…
>He has ever sexually engaged with any woman while she was underage

Let's stop right here. What she has written thus far has effectively said:
If one has done <action> in the past, one is now a supporter of <action>, and forever will be a supporter of <action>.

This is like me saying to her:
You have lied in the past. You are a supporter of lying. You will always be a supporter of lying.

What I believe truly is the problem here is that she has not properly defined the problem at hand.

cont'd

>>1787085
If we consider my modified scientific method to writing essays---a category under which I feel her blog post falls---we can examine what must be accomplished in such a writing:

1. Define the problem
2. Gather information relevant to the problem
3. Determine a prudent approach towards the solution of the problem
4. Implement the approach in practice
5. Analyze the effects of the implementation
6. Interpret effects and strategize the argument
7. Publish the argument
8. Modify argument when necessary

In failing to properly define the problem, the rest of the writing is inevitably going to fail.

So what is the real problem here?

>>1787095
Yeah, I wonder if she honestly believes by modifying sexual behavior in men to this extreme degree will end the phenomenon of rape.

>>1787095
The knee-jerk response to such a question is likely: "Men. Men are the problem."

'Men', however, cannot be a problem. Rape, similarly, is not a good way to define the problem. In order for a problem to be clearly defined, it is best to have a subject and an object.

The problem could be: The rape of women by men.

But lets take this a step farther. Let's say that the true problem at hand is: The objectification of women by men.

>>1787095
I feel like she's only writing to define a problem (a good thing to keep in mind: not everything you encounter on the internet is going to be written for a formal academic setting!) and that problem is certain mindsets or beliefs that can lead to relaxed attitudes about rape. But yes, she does cast a wide net that catches some mindsets that aren't necessarily bad, or things the person in question may have done or believed in the past but can change.

>>1787102
If we follow her lead in abstracting things to a more basic level than the individual we can go from cultural reasons to biological, therefore rape exists in the human species because it has been on some level evolutionarily adaptive. Where this takes us is to the logical solution being some form of eugenics. Both that culture supports the existence of rape, and that it almost certainly has some biological underpinning (whether specifically selected for, or just not selected against) are clearly true, the problem with both is that many of the solutions both would suggest are ethically questionable. For example her attack on pornography being defended as a form of free speech and her attack on the ability of women to make a self determined choice to be prostitutes.

Ultimately, while studying the cultural and biological underpinnings to the phenomenon of rape can help us in seeking solutions to it I believe that it's intellectually dishonest to treat those views as being the fundamental issue. The core of it is that someone's will and self-determination are being forcibly violated by either the will or disregard of the aggressor.

>>1787108
>Let's say that the true problem at hand is: The objectification of women by men.
Which has a whole array affects, only the most extreme of which is rape. From this ridiculous, hyperbolic version of radical feminism which seems to be really popular with attention-grabbing bloggers, one would get the impression that all women are completely and totally subordinated ruthlessly all the time to all men and there is no possibility for them to ever do anything about it, except complain about it on the internet. Rape rape rape human trafficking rape rape. It's idiotic and triggering, and again smacks of internalized misogyny. And a lot of actual sex workers who have faced more brutality at the hands of men are made out to be either complicit in rape or rapists themselves. Which is fucked up on so many levels.

>>1787128
How is rape an advantage in the evolution of the human species?

>>1787108
Without doing too much research, or giving too much thought to this problem, it seems to me that she does have quite a bit of information regarding the problem that I have stated.

Men, being the subject of the problem, act on the object of the problem. Almost the entire blog post discusses characteristics and actions of the subject.

If she already has this much information regarding the thing she wants to change, the subject, then it should not be hard to manipulate this subject to produce different results (actions by the subject).

What this involves, however, is action by the object of the problem. Woman, in acting and becoming the subject in a new perspective of this transitional dichotomy, can serve in their own interest by playing a large role in the solution of this problem.

Women, through action and not passivity, can literally and figuratively become the subject of the solution.

>>1787139
It's not an adaptive behavior for the whole species. Like theft, which is not advantageous, it's adaptive for certain individuals within the group. Genes aren't selected based on adaptivity for the whole species, just for adaptivity for the individual who passes them on.

>>1787144
So, is the problem the phenomenon of rape itself? I really disagree with contemporary liberalism and the idea of a highly-effective social management that would eliminate negative behaviors. The ideas expressed in this blog post don't seem to advocate any concrete response, but generally it supports the notion of mass behavior modification. I tend to agree with what was said earlier ITT about how class is the most definite stratification.

There's no point in trying to rebut this blog post. It's a polemic, and it operates as polemics do: it takes a great deal as given and it's delivered in an intentionally incendiary way. If we want to rebut it, we have to infer her logic in addition to critiquing it while enduring insults. I'm not sure that can even really be done. The issues here are deeply contentious and broad. What constitutes a minor? Does pornography remotely cause the degradation of women? Is the legal redefinition of rape ethical? Legally sound? We're talking book-length questions here.

that list is ludicrous. some of the most harcore second-wave feminists i know wouldn't agree with every item on this list.

>>1787150
Yes, but I don't see why it would be adaptive for the individual either. Wouldn't the potential offspring from a rape be subject to abandonment or abortion in most cases? You could even project this response to the very earliest human communities..to me it makes sense to assume that modern men of ancient eras would be no less likely to shun the children of a rapist and therefore rape would not be adaptive. From what I understand, rape developed more as an act of violence--a way of demoralizing a rival community during times of conflict, not as some last-ditch effort at procreation.

>>1787157

also this. hard.

Just wanted to say... I'm very impressed with /lit/. You have proven saging anon here >>1785798 wrong.

>>1787153
>I tend to agree with what was said earlier ITT about how class is the most definite stratification.

One could argue that the most effective way to allow for greater class identification is to have a dialogue about and amongst the groups into which the class is divided thus necessitating feminism, the gay rights movement, and the civil rights movement as antecedents to addressing interclass issues.

>>1787157
I also take a degree of offense to what seems to be a really fundamental misuse of very serious terms. Rape. Psychological torture. Even IF pornography and sexualized advertisement etc does contribute to the denigration of woman, I don't think the mechanism is so direct as to warrant the terminology. It's the wrong degree. I take rape, torture, the kind that's apparent, very, very seriously.

>>1787159
>that list is ludicrous. some of the most harcore second-wave feminists i know wouldn't agree with every item on this list.

Radical Feminism as found today isn't second wave feminism any more than any other third wave group is. Though some would like to claim legitimate "succession" all the movements have their intellectual and philosophical roots in second wave feminism. It's not a holdover from second wave feminism as it is a feminism that arose as a result of second wave feminism the same as all the others. Of course at this point there would be plenty of fairly radical second wave feminists who wouldn't agree with them.

>>1787166
Yeah I agree that there is a need to address the dynamics within a class, but I think this kind of discourse must return to the awareness of class, or else you have a self-defeating and divided class incapable of establishing its autonomy.

Wow, I think this one of the fastest threads I've ever seen on /lit/. ~200 replies in ~7 hours.

>>1787166
>>1787188
As interesting and useful as all this theoretical stuff is, I've come to think the best way to get over all this stuff is just to, well, go over it. Start at ground level in our own personal, social, economic, etc. lives and build as much as possible institutions and practices that support the kinds of lives we want people to lead. Build up from there as possible.

Economically, it's practically guaranteed to work, if people will actually do it. The current global economic order is so patently fucking doomed, and there's nothing waiting in the wings to take its place. Nothing worries me more than that.

>>1787166
The problem with this is group dynamics. Check out the Robber's Cave study. When you get oppositional groups together, cognition becomes warped. I would argue the OP's blog example is at least on one level an example of this sort of thing.

Summary here:

http://oyc.yale.edu/yale/psychology/introduction-to-psychology/content/transcripts/transcript15.html

>>1787161
>From what I understand, rape developed more as an act of violence--a way of demoralizing a rival community during times of conflict, not as some last-ditch effort at procreation.

There are selection arguments that could be made based on this too. The real evidence to it being in some way biological is its existence in other similar species, pointing to a possible common ancestral behavior. The thing is, you can pin any behavior down to biology since all our actions are inherently based on the interaction of genes and the environment around us.

The argument I was trying to make was that in the same way it would be misguided to focus solely on biological factors when trying to tackle rape as an issue it is misguided to focus too much on the sociological factors over the individual factors.

I think the blogger OP quoted's actual argument is more that "all exploitation of women it tantamount to rape" because they all spring from a common root cause. I find that argument to be both useless to addressing any of the specific problems and trivializing to the very real trauma caused by the more extreme forms of the brutalization and exploitation of women (ex. rape, FGM, sex trafficking, etc.)

My bit: Everyone's already said it, but the list is ludicrous. That makes every guy I know a rapist, simply on the porn alone. I watch porn, lesbian/gay/straight, why am I not a rapist?

I think what bothers me is the list starts off pretty good, then loses me immediately at the porn bullets. It's the fact that a man having any of those opinions IS a rapist, and not simply has an offending mindset/set of beliefs.

Seriously, this lady can fuck off.

>>1787198
I really doubt the effectiveness of institutions to help people live the lives that they want to. Institutions seem only to satisfy the needs of the institutions. I'm not a fan of ayn rand, don't get me wrong--but instead of institution i would advocate a more autonomous population and a "commons" where the satisfaction of desires would occur in "organic" free association. But that's just my utopia.
>>1787199
Cool, I will read it when tomorrow (it's 4 in the fucking morning here :/ )
>>1787200
Oh yes, I totally agree--to consider only one dimension of a problem is fruitless. And I completely, completely agree with the fact that the use of the word "rape" is trivializing in this blog post--as a victim of rape myself, I would like to point out that a guy watching porn is not the same as someone who would be complicit in or actually rape me.

Hey, c/lit/s, fa/tg/uy here. What's going on in here?

>>1787183

agreed.

>>1787208
Oh, nothing much. Jus' talkin' 'bout rape and stuff.

Has the OP in your image had much success/progress?

>>1787214

Quite a bit, actually.

http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/14288873/

>>1787208
In that post, what does "PC" mean, exactly?

>>1787218

player character

>>1787218

Player Character.

>>1787216

Sometimes I just love 4chan...

>>1787221
okay, what is a player character? I really want to understand what this douche is talking about. Is it something from a vidya game? I don't vidya game much.

>>1787207
>i would advocate a more autonomous population and a "commons" where the satisfaction of desires would occur in "organic" free association

Well, work to build it then.

I didn't mean "institution" in a rigid or bureaucratic way; I mean it in a way that includes any sort of organized social activity or way of organizing people. Could be a fucking knitting circle.

If I understand you correctly, I think what I want is similar but not identical to what you're talking about. I'm definitely big on individual autonomy, but you need a really robust and indulgent commons to support it, or else it winds up getting limited by other things.

>>1787226

It's the character that players play as in vidya, pen n paper games, etc. Obviously the creative freedom to make the Rape Factory doesn't really exist in a vidya setting, so he's almost certainly talking about some sort of PnP rpg.

>>1787198
>Start at ground level in our own personal
This is what I advocate. As powerful as the written or spoken word is in manipulating humans, it is very difficult to put this in practice, especially if you are trying to achieve specific results. The difficulty in this only increases when you are writing non-fiction, I believe.

The more practical way of having surefire affect is through your own personal actions. If I am to ask myself: How can I act in a way that will help to improve the situation, and then act in that way, others will see my actions and follow similarly, especially if these actions are seen to produce benefit.

This is not to discourage writers, on the contrary, it is a challenge to take the path less traveled by. I wish that I, myself, possessed the skill and ability to create works of art that helped in proving the reflection of life from art---which is a statement that I have tendency to believe in.

>>1787228
Yeah I guess the word "institution" is to me loaded with the idea of power structures, and administrative body and a top-down creation of goals. And I'm definitely trying to do a little for establishing, or "taking back" the commons. I think an obstacle to a "robust" commons (i like how you put that) is consumer culture, and I wonder what can be done to shift away from that, even in my own thinking, as it is highly influenced by the consumer culture.

>>1787226

No, it's a roleplaying game term. You know, like Dungeons and Dragons? A bunch of guys sitting around a table, with dice and sheets of paper and stuff? One of these is the Game Master or Dungeon Master, who describes the environment and runs the general inhabitants of a setting. The others are players, whose characters interact with said setting.

>>1787226
In gaming, there's a basic dichotomy between player characters and non-player characters. (PCs and NPCs.)

Player characters are the ones controlled by actual humans, the players. NPCs are controlled by the game itself, in vidya some sort of usually simple AI, in /tg/ maybe a die roll or something.

>>1787236
Oh I see. Well in that case, I suppose this person is a rape supporter.

>>1787199
Very interesting read, I'm not sure that it necessarily eliminates the need for the current in-group out-group dynamics related to race, sexuality, sex, and gender to be either resolved or suborned though. I don't mean we need to further separate people by further subdividing them, but rather I'm saying that before class inequality can be effectively addressed the already existing divides need to be integrated with one another at least enough for people to stop focusing on intraclass politics instead of interclass politics. To me it seems that the most effective way to do this is to address and redress the issues dividing those groups to defuse that conflict.

I'm going to sleep, but when I wake up, this thread better have 400+ posts

>>1787235
I'm awfully damned tired, so I'm not really going to be able to respond well.

So I'm sure we're on the same page, what exactly do you mean by consumer culture?

>>1787251
Yeah I'm tired as well, so I was a bit sloppy calling it "consumer culture"..but basically it's this desire-satisfaction relationship that is divided along the lines of producer and consumer. In a robust commons, there would be a synthesis of producer and consumer (specifically production and consumption of culture) and it would eliminate the institution of financial/symbolic mediation (like money)..but yea, way too tired to be developing the idea well.

What's this shit doing on /lit/? Amerifags, I am disappoint.
Reported.

>>1787254
Well I guess we'll save it for another night, in another thread probably.

>>1787261
Troll? Asshole? Either way you're worse than the writer who instigated this whole thread.

>>1785761
>>1785761
>>1785761
>>1785761
>>1785761


http://evebitfirst.wordpress.com/2011/05/19/over-9000/

Just in case hadn't already noticed, she's a fucking TROLL. You've just been had.

>>1787266
Yeah hopefully we can pick up later, it sucks that the best discussions usually happen around 4 in the morning my time.

>>1787266
why it's a bad thing to report a shitty non-lit thread?

>>1787272
I might start a thread tomorrow; I'm EST too, so something should work out.

I could probably keep going if I had some fucking coffee, but I don't. I'm usually good for these 4-AM-good-discussions.

>>1787277
Because it's a good thread?
Because it's about the same stuff literature is about?
Because for those reasons /lit/ is 4chan's default philosophy and general cultural criticism board?

>>1787270
It's already been noted in the thread that she's being intentionally provocative, just because she recognizes the internet cultures that drove her hits to spike doesn't make her only intent trolling and it doesn't make serious discussion of the issues she raised invalid.

>>1787288
>Because it's a good thread?
No, it's a troll thread, and everyone who posted in it seriously and without a sage it's an idiot.
>Because it's about the same stuff literature is about?
Sorry, many things in this world are about the same stuff literature is about. Like music, films, video games and shit. Still they are not posted on here.
>Because for those reasons /lit/ is 4chan's default philosophy and general cultural criticism board?
Nope, try again. /lit/ is not /r9k/, /b/, /soc/, /adv/ etc. This is what this thread is about and it doesn't belong here.

>>1787288
>Because it's a good thread?
No, it's a troll thread, and everyone who posted in it seriously and without a sage it's an idiot.
>Because it's about the same stuff literature is about?
Sorry, many things in this world are about the same stuff literature is about. Like music, films, video games and shit. Still they are not posted on here.
>Because for those reasons /lit/ is 4chan's default philosophy and general cultural criticism board?
Nope, try again. /lit/ is not /r9k/, /b/, /soc/, /adv/ etc. This is what this thread is about and it doesn't belong here.

>>1787307
no fun, baby, no fun.
>>1787282
Yeah, I would be better off if I hadn't been doing so much heroin tonight.

>>1787307
>troll thread

Irrelevant, if it's true. Posting a link to a provocative text does not in and of itself a troll make, first of all. Second, have you read the thread? It's a really good thread despite its inauspicious origins.

>Still they are not posted on here.

No, this thread is about the same things literature is about: sex, politics, culture, etc. I wouldn't rule out this thread on /p/ or /tv/ or whatever, either. Except we talk about it better on /lit/.

There's no where else on 4chan this thread is better suited to be unless you insist on myopically filing things away in their little bins for no damned reason.

>>1787270
>You've just been had.
I didn't visit the link in the op, I didn't "contribute" to this thread, I didn't care (or fall) for the troll as others ITT did.
So, why I've been had?

>>1787313
Particularly given that the discussion did eventually reference the works of various authors once it got rolling.

>>1787316
Didn't contribute to the thread, except you come in to sage and hand out criticism of people who did. That's petty, bro. If you had read the thread, you might see why it was pretty nice. I think it was just 2deep4u.

>>1787261
Good point. I love this board when America sleeps.
Even if it's slower, it's still about literature and is not filled with trolls and idiots.

>>1787326
>I didn't "contribute" to this thread
Please observe the commas before and after the word "contribute".
It's no contribution when you post (and bump) a troll thread. Just sage and report, make your own thread filled with "pretty nice" things and sugar on top.

>He has ever sexually engaged with any woman while she was underage
I understand the reasoning, but what if the guy is underage too? Is a 17 year old chick having sex with a 16 year old guy being raped?

>or subjected to psychological, physical, economic, or emotional coercion.
aren't we all? like all the time?

>>1788484
y u bumping this thread?

>>1788489
To mock you.

>>1787329
>thinks we sleep

>Women are so fucking stupid that they cannot think or make sexual decisions for themselves no matter their age

Real solid feminist philosophy there

>>1788545

it's really easy to argue against a writer when you make them take a stance they did not express in their article, huh

>>1788493
do u know me?

>>1788511
And which one are you? The troll, or the idiot?

>>1787249
>~220 posts in 7 hours
>12 hours later, ~20 more posts.

I am disappointed.

>>1788547
>He defends the physical abuse of women on the grounds of “consent.”

Sure looks to me like she's saying that women can't REALLY consent to S&M.

>>1788566

really? since it looks to me like you're foggy on the definition of either "abuse" or "s&m"

>>1788559
>>1788559


STOP BUMPING THIS THREAD "EVE'S DAUGHTER" YOU ATTENTION WHORE!!

>>1788570
In what other way is any form of sexual activity which could be construed as "abuse" commonly consented to? This woman means things like spanking, tying up, choking, etc. She finds them derogatory to women even if the women like it - she thinks they have been warped by a sick society and so get off on the horrible oppression of male domination and the pain they inflict upon the HOLY FEMININE FORM.

she thanked 4chan for all the attention

http://evebitfirst.wordpress.com/2011/05/19/over-9000/

lol what a butthurt faggot

>>1788570
It looks to me like the author has a foggy definition of either "abuse" or "s&m". Have you ever heard of a situation in which a man hit his wife "because she wanted it" other than in S&M?

>>1788573

nope, p sure you're reading stuff into her remark based on preconceived notions of feminism

abuse is defined as "harmful, injurious, or offensive;" if a woman derives sexual satisfaction from spanking or bondage or whatever then by definition she isn't being abused, my guess is the author's making a point about consent to intercourse not being the same as blanket consent to all sex acts, dig?

>>1788576
>Because that thread alone had over 300 comments still in the moderation cue
>cue

She's illiterate, too. Excellent!

>>1788577

Domestic discipline. A lot of people are into that stuff.

Anyone else notice how theres no pic of her anywhere on the blog....

I read that entire thread, this pic summarizes my stance on her.

Doesn't bother me, I'm not guilty of any of those propositions. No need for insecurity.

>>1788582
I'm not the guy you've been arguing with, that was my first post. I think you're an idiot, btw. Every single other thing in that list relates directly to sex -- except this one? Oh? This one that has a just-as-if-not-more logical alternative, which everyone but you agrees with?

Oh, okay.

>>1788606
never got laid while drunk?
fail

>>1788614
Not as a tool to make her easier.

>>1788631
thats not relevant, read the list again faggot

To those who believe she is a troll because of her subsequent "over 9000" post:

Such a defense in response to valid criticisms of her writing reeks of ex post facto rationalization.

Also, even if she didn't believe what she had written, there are a large number of women who indeed hold these or similar beliefs---as evidenced in many of the comments on the blog---and this fact makes the significance of her intent valueless.

>>1788633
just did, you fail to make your point

>>1788644
>>1788644
>there are a large number of women who indeed hold these or similar beliefs

If by large you mean tiny, then yes.

ya'll so guilty

Are you guys fucking idiots? There's an archive going back a year. Very unlikely that this is a troll.

>>1788654
>doesn't speak with many women

>>1788675
>>1788675

GET THE FUCK OFF OF /LIT/ "EVE'S DAUGHTER" YOU ATTENTION WHORE!!

>>1788667

Armond White has been trolling for like 25 years. Zizek even longer than that. Dedication doesn't mean it's not trolling.

This post is just ridiculous. By pigeon-holing all men as rapists or rape-supporters, she is in turn pigeon-holing women as the lowly victims, the damsels in distress. Stereotypical gender roles for men are just as problematic as the ones for women are. Feminism is a two way street (or at least it should be) and the woman who wrote that blog is clearly just all about herself. Feminism should be about girl love, not man hate. And yes there is a huge difference.

I just feel really bad for her tbh because she's always going to be angry at something.

>>1786200
Sure babe, just be a dear and do it right the first time.

why does her blog reek of foreveralone beachwhale?

>>1788716
I think she just needs some hard dick.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=geQyrBGS_60

FUCK this. I support rape, openly. If it werent for the imposed 'meaning' of sexual intercourse beyond a primal urge nobody would give a shit.

>>1788714
Feminism should be about achieving equal opportunity in society, nothing more. Anything beyond is corrupting.

So much asspain and denial.

So much aspirin and dominoes.

"http://evebitfirst.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/a-man-is-a-rape-supporter-if/"
Author of this blog is guilty of rape support by subordinating the sexual desires of females.

Apparently I am rape supporter on many accounts, except the one about the actual raping of course. I am so racked with guilt I may not jerk off again all the way until tomorrow.

So if a woman disagrees that almost all men are rape supporters (this is what she said in the comments) a rape supporter too? If you disagree with eve are you, by definition, a rape supporter? Maybe that should be added to the list, if you deny that any of these actions supports rape you're downplaying rape and thereby supporting it? Hmmm

I saw a girl wearing pasties at a rave last week. Instead of thinking of her as a complex and interesting human being, I thought of her as a tool for my pleasure. I took her back to her place and fucked her. I'm so disgusted with myself, I'm just going to turn myself in to the police. She didn't really want to fuck me. She didn't really want to wear pasties. She didn't really want orgasm when my thick, hard black dick hit her g-spot. It's all the patriarchy's fault for making her think she's a wanton pleasure-seeker. I am a man and I am garbage.

>>1788812
Also doesn't the word 'support' imply some degree of intentionality? How much of this is just sloppy syllogism? Contribution/reinforcement = support, patriarchy = misogyny = rape, therefore reinforcement of patriarchy = rape support. I might agree that most of these actions are sexist, but I don't even, wtf

>>1788818

haha no you didnt

>>1788822
Yeah...

>>1788819
I wonder, is punching a fascist in the face being a rape supporter?

>>1788826
punching = enforcing power over someone else = patriarchy = misogyny = rape

Yes.

>>1788840
breathing=rape
ironically, the only thing which isnt equal to rape is rape itself

>>1788826
dismissing women who draw attention to rape as fascists is probably rape support if that's what you're getting at. disagreeing with reductionist interpretations of radical feminism is rape support because not having such a broad definition of rape excuses actual rape. everyone supports rape. circular logic, false syllogism everywhere

If every man is a rape supporter, there's no reason to hide it.

Tonights plans:
1: Get my rape on
2: Help my bros get their rape on

>>1788852
i've seen porn of women having sex with animals. now thats what i call awesome! yeah!

Isn't the bump limit 300 posts?
We're almost there!

>>1788851
Not sure why it's circular logic... Yeah, I'm sure she would say that people saying her list is too strict are rape supporters. That seems the only logical way to do it.

I'm kind of impressed that the number of views is 'over 9000'. She's not one of those meme-unaware radical feminists.

>>1788862

OP here. Don't worry, I'll make a new one when we hit the limit.

>>1788851
i just realized from her other blog posts that eve is pretty transphobic. if denying the identities, struggle, oppression of trans people justifies transmisogyny and rape (it surely does) as much as doing the same to women, is eve a rape supporter? just saying, hypocrite

>>1788859
Am I a rape supporter? I get off on dogs fucking women, but I also get off on dogs fucking men.

Author of the site disabled comments.
All I could think of was " Oh,you coward."

http://evebitfirst.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/ebf001.png

>>1788920
WTFAMIREADING.GIF

>>1788869
>i just realized from her other blog posts that eve is pretty transphobic

Radfems are always transphobic.