KEEP SAFE: 'Make rape legal' group plan events in Shambles Square & worldwide

[PinkFinal]

Wonder how they'd feel if their wife mother or sister was raped. Some people really do have too much time on their hands if they've found a way in their warped minds to justify rape.

 

[Barcon]

To bad they're not having an event in Toronto. I could have went down and nailed a couple of the cunts foreheads together with my new paslode framing nailer.

 

[EalingBlue2]

This is the guy who a few months ago a few people were hounded off this board for having the temerity to suggest that a book which he wrote in which he brags of raping an un obvious woman in Iceland was banned.

Where are all the voices from the righteous right normally so vocal on this forum defending his right to free speech and to stand up for what he believes, which is changing the law so that rape is no longer a crime on private property.

I suspect that at all these sites 100's of anti Roosh people will turn up all over the world hoping to meet the sickos who support him and he will get loads and loads of publicity which is all this exercise is about!

like too many of the species an inadequate failure of a man who thinks he can be a bigger man by dominating a woman. Does he really believe it though? Or is he just making money out of inadequate males?

 

[Why Always Ste]

Heard of this group. Watched a documentary recently on them, C4 I think it was on.

I disagree with the main guys views from watching that documentary but I agree with his right to express his views, and would go down there but only to hear what they had to say.
The same as I'd also go down to a Pro-Feminist rally and listen to their views.

It's a fucked up place and they have their own pathways in which they will eventually learn the truth.

 

[Damocles]

A "pro rape" group? The world is indeed a fucked up place. If we've got any 7 foot 400lb gorillas on here, nip down and rape a few of these cunts. They won't complain.

It isn't really a pro-rape group. It's a group who believe that the current legal boundaries of what constitutes consent are wrong. The leader is one of those red pill knobheads, but the only thing more of a dick than him are the people who write these inaccurate and stupidly over sensationalized stories.

To be honest from what I remember reading of the bloke the last time the controversy around him was on here, his views probably represent the views of much of this forum

 

[Damocles]

No genuine feminist would advocate that anyone PROVEN to have made false rape claims should go unpunished

No true feminist huh?

 

[EalingBlue2]

It isn't really a pro-rape group. It's a group who believe that the current legal boundaries of what constitutes consent are wrong. The leader is one of those red pill knobheads, but the only thing more of a dick than him are the people who write these inaccurate and stupidly over sensationalized stories.

To be honest from what I remember reading of the bloke the last time the controversy around him was on here, his views probably represent the views of much of this forum

He wants to shift the current legal boundaries a lot, basically rape should be legal (IE not a crime against an adult woman) on private property . IE by entering private property be that business or domestic a woman has consented. I reckon even the greatest male victims on here who feel deeply persecuted would probably lot be that extreme.

I think the sensationalism is fair it is just that it is playing into his hands as it is this attention the pathetic idiot craves

Given the utter outrage on here about how women need to be protected I expect a huge outcry.

 

[Damocles]

basically rape should be legal (IE not a crime against an adult woman) on private property . IE by entering private property be that business or domestic a woman has consented.

That's not what he said. He said that if a woman meets a guy at a nightclub then goes home with him for the purposes of sex then she has consented to sex. Not something I personally think holds much water but that is what he actually said. What you put is an inference of what he said, rather than what he said.

I think the sensationalism is fair

Sensationalism is never fair. That's like saying "I think lies are fair".

Either you hold the media to account or you don't, you can't just pick and choose when it's ok for the media to completely spin out stories.

 

[EalingBlue2]

That's not what he said. He said that if a woman meets a guy at a nightclub then goes home with him for the purposes of sex then she has consented to sex. Not something I personally think holds much water but that is what he actually said. What you put is an inference of what he said, rather than what he said.



Sensationalism is never fair. That's like saying "I think lies are fair".

Either you hold the media to account or you don't, you can't just pick and choose when it's ok for the media to completely spin out stories.

His group calls for rape to be decriminalised on private property you portray a justification argument he has used for this not the policy. You point to a version of withdrawn consent they have called for much more than this.

As for sensationalism that is the world you can rally against it but that is essentially trying to be the King Canute of the modern world . Sensationalism is here, it's reality and to live in the modern world you have to deal with it whether you approve or not. As you can choose on which opinions to respect or not so you can choose when you think sensationalism is justified or not.

 

[big phil]

Thought I'd misread the thread title or the OP had made an error. The world's gone fucking mad, and this is where the free speech line gets a bit blurred for me. How do cunts like these have the right to march/demonstrate/congregate?

 

[Damocles]

His group calls for rape to be decriminalised on private property you portray a justification argument he has used for this not the policy. You point to a version of withdrawn consent they have called for much more than this.

As for sensationalism that is the world you can rally against it but that is essentially trying to be the King Canute of the modern world . Sensationalism is here, it's reality and to live in the modern world you have to deal with it whether you approve or not. As you can choose on which opinions to respect or not so you can choose when you think sensationalism is justified or not.

No you can't.

You can't say it's ok for the press to lie about things you disagree with but not ok to lie about things that you agree with. This makes you a hypocrite.

 

[yankcitizen76]

God. I hope people don't lump Men's Rights Groups in with this group of wackos. But of course they do! It makes the fight for things like gender neutral domestic abuse policy that much more difficult.

 

[EalingBlue2]

No you can't.

You can't say it's ok for the press to lie about things you disagree with but not ok to lie about things that you agree with. This makes you a hypocrite.

Sensationalism and lies are two very different things, my comments entirely about the sensationalism of this story and it being hyped with him a woman hater. Haven't read the lies or commented on them and if there are lies I assume that would be dealt with by the courts

 

[Damocles]

Sensationalism and lies are two very different things, my comments entirely about the sensationalism of this story and it being hyped with him a woman hater. Haven't read the lies or commented on them and if there are lies I assume that would be dealt with by the courts

Sensationalism is by definition a lie. It is twisting the true facts of a story in order to make it more enraging to the masses. Like by saying things like:

His group calls for rape to be decriminalised on private property

When what you mean is

He thinks women who agreed to go home with him after a night out have consented to sex

That is an out and out lie. It is changing what is said into something more enraging to the general masses.

 

[geoff clipp]

Heard of this group. Watched a documentary recently on them, C4 I think it was on.

I disagree with the main guys views from watching that documentary but I agree with his right to express his views, and would go down there but only to hear what they had to say.
The same as I'd also go down to a Pro-Feminist rally and listen to their views.

It's a fucked up place and they have their own pathways in which they will eventually learn the truth.

Understand your point about being interested in what he has to say, but I also think we need to be careful about pitching this kind of thing as the male version of a pro-feminist rally.

This guy writes manuals on how to rape. He's advocated forced marriage. He portrays women as disgusting sluts that should be subservient to men.

Feminism by defintion - the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men.

You would think most people could get behind that, in the same way most right minded people understand believe that black people should be treated equally. Sure there might be small factions of the feminist movement that have ridiculous ideas, but that's not really what its all about or how people should be defining it.

 

[M18CTID]

Sensationalist or not, if he's advocating decriminalising rape on private property then that's surely enough to set the alarm bells ringing.

 

[EalingBlue2]

Sensationalism is by definition a lie. It is twisting the true facts of a story in order to make it more enraging to the masses. Like by saying things like:



When what you mean is



That is an out and out lie. It is changing what is said into something more enraging to the general masses.

No he has said that the law needs to be changed and that in effect rape on private property would not be a crime if that woman had entered that property willingly. He specified all women not women he picked up, he did not talk about intoxication (other than effectively saying if you drink you get what you get). What you are saying is your interpretation of his motives not what the group are advocating as Law change.

Your definition of a lie is your definition of a lie, I prefer to look at the legal definition of a lie which is what applies in this.

So in this case you are setting your own definitions and setting your own thoughts on his motives (and you may be correct) but that's not the point

 

[EalingBlue2]

Understand your point about being interested in what he has to say, but I also think we need to be careful about pitching this kind of thing as the male version of a pro-feminist rally.

This guy writes manuals on how to rape. He's advocated forced marriage. He portrays women as disgusting sluts that should be subservient to men.

Feminism by defintion - the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men.

You would think most people could get behind that, in the same way most right minded people understand believe that black people should be treated equally. Sure there might be small factions of the feminist movement that have ridiculous ideas, but that's not really what its all about or how people should be defining it.

It's fucked up thinking with much in common with some extremes of religion and needs to be condemned in the same way that condemnation has been made towards religions promoting such awful behaviour

 

[mancityvstoke]

Why stay away? get down there and take a big fuck off pole to shove right up their.........

 

[I'm With Stupid]

Where are all the voices from the righteous right normally so vocal on this forum defending his right to free speech and to stand up for what he believes, which is changing the law so that rape is no longer a crime on private property.

It depends what he actually writes/preaches. Incitement to violence is a criminal offence, so anything that encourages men to commit rape or helps men get away with rape would be illegal. Beyond that, he can write whatever he wants and campaign for any changes in the law he wants. So yeah, there's no absolute right to free speech in the UK. The line is incitement to violence, which encouraging or enabling rape would clearly cross.