Page: 1

smoke check

Profile Information

Member since: Mon Jun 2, 2014, 04:15 PM
Number of posts: 6,067

Journal Archives

Feminists admit their 1 in 5 statistic is a gross distortion; now claim the number is 1 in 3.

They even have the government of Quebec saying as much. As Goebbels said, the bigger the lie, the easier it is for people to believe it.

Those enterprising Quebecois feminists have even set up a Facebook page where women can anonymously (engage in a witch hunt) make accusations against men. They place being slapped on the butt as the same level as penetrative rape, claiming that it is the gravity of the event is in the mind of the victim. Attempts to point out that fallacy are viewed as supporting the patriarchy and the rape culture.

They even manage to blame the patriarchy for lesbian rape in one ain't that some shit.

Two House of Commons members (Liberals) have been accused anonymously and pretty boy, son of Pierre Trudeau, and current leader of the Liberals Justin Trudeau suspended them pending an investigation. Read that again. They have effectively been punished based on unproven anonymous claims, until what? This is presumed guilt. Whatever happened to presumed innocence? The benefit of the doubt does not belong to the accuser.

The best information available indicates that half or more of all rapes reported to the authorities are either unfounded or false. What is the likelihood of an anonymous posting of such on the web being true?

(Yes it's in French, I was practicing last night and came across this.)

The Wider Issue of the Unaccountable

We have all had the chance to watch as people, who have never or rarely, been held accountable for themselves or their actions burned down everything they could find in their neighborhood to send a message. Apparently the message sent and received is that the few people that were willing to come to their neighborhood and operate a business should relocate some place safer. Within a year or two, there will likely be articles that mention Ferguson, MO as another urban food dessert that "somebody" should really do "something" about.

I don't want to focus on that in such a narrow sense. What is playing out on the screens has less to do with race and more to do with the culture of the poor in America today. In truth, I don't know how the government ever really decided to locate poor blacks in somewhat concentrated areas and spread the poor whites all over the place. It probably has less to do with racism than some notion of trying to keep them near some sort of family support.

I have taken work as a contractor on section 8 housing before. I can tell you some stories. Like the apartment that had the stench of rotting death in it, that was one of the worst. I could tell you about women that told me about their children's biological father having six or seven kids scattered across four states, and despite enforcement measures, he never pays a dime. I could tell you about men, that when they weren't in jail, split time between the housing of three or four women he had kids with, and how they bragged about the government paying for their kids, so why should they try.

If you ask a deputy, he can tell you which houses and areas are the government supported poor ones. They will have the most calls, including nuisance calls, domestic violence, and kids causing problems that could be solved with a dose of discipline, but won't be. Those kids will wind up on either the fast track to prison or become the next generation of young mothers totally reliant on a state that has taken on almost all the responsibilities that properly belong to the men and fathers of these children. The drug of choice might be a little different. The violence involved in the turf wars may be rarer and sharper, but poor white communities mostly face a set of problems that are the same as the poor black communities.

The government, in acts of benevolence, took away the negative consequences of poor choices, most especially for women. The government steps in and orders child support. The government steps in and provides low cost housing,free food, healthcare, and even incidental money to women, and worse they haand over a set of money for each kid she has. There is an ironclad rule of economics that says the government will always get what it pays for. Government pays for indigent kids, the government gets indigent kids. The problem is that each successive generation loses skills that the older generation had. Fathers never teach boys how to be men and girls what a man should be like. Women lose discernment to the point it turns into "I like how he smiles at me, let's fuck!" Boys without a man around that is willing and able to temper their adolescent passions run to trouble. I know women don't like this, but a thirty-something 120 lb. woman is not going to be able to effectively control a 185 lb. fifteen year old boy, it just ain't gonna happen. The generation after that just seems to get into more trouble.

The poor must be taught to be accountable again. I fear that it will take generations, but what the modern welfare system has produced is a travesty of apocalyptic proportions. How many lives frittered away that could have produced something useful have been crushed in this perverse system. It doesn't know a skin color.

Feminism and the rape culture

Okay, I won't post the video, but the facts are cogent and relevant.

Feminists have a weird religious thing going with rape right now and what they like to call...the rape culture. I've been to places where a real rape culture exists, and believe me, it isn't here.

All of the major religions have four identifiable elements:
1. Unprovable
2. Not supported by any facts.
3. Control Behavior
4. Offers a reward in the future for good behavior.

This fits the feminist idea of rape culture fairly exactly.

1. Their claim of a rape culture is unprovable. In fact, it comes almost entirely from a survey conducted at two colleges with no control or peer review of the data. They included acts such as attempted forcible kissing, which let's face it, is not cool, but also is not sexual assault.

2. Feminists claim that almost 20% of women are the victims of sexual assault, a very specific crime. In fact the total numbers for the year 2012 as released by the FBI's UCR reveal that anyone's chance of being sexually assaulted stands at .0267%. If you present facts that you know not to be true, then you are lying. In fact the only place that gets to 20% in the US is the prisons, and that is male on male, and let's face it, feminists don't really care about it.

3. Feminists use the claim of rape to shut down any substantive discussion, even and especially if they want to review a woman's actions that left her in the position to be sexually assaulted, and may help others to not be. It is shouted down as blaming the victim. If you left the door to your house and the windows opened, and you get burglarized, it still isn't your fault, but there are some things you could have done differently that could have prevented it. The same is likely true for many instances of sexual assault. Culpable factors don't make it the victim's fault.

Would you send your daughter to a college campus if there were really a 20% chance of her getting raped?

All men are (potential) rapists. Survey says...No.

25% of DNA tests on rape kits exonerate the accused. Additionally 27% of "victims" admit to lying when faced with a polygraph test.

4. Feminists in the 1960s and 1970s promised a new kind and just world if only the patriarchy were overthrown. Well, good news, it has been. There are more women than men in the workforce. Women attain high level college degrees at a rate 33% higher than men, yet still receive more financial aid, and have 151 federal laws to "even the workplace playing field".

No fault divorce, encouraged by feminists has led to many children having no father in the home. 70 to 80% of all incarcerated in the United States did not have a father in the home. Single mothers, they do a great job of keeping our prisons stocked.

California just passed a "Yes" means "Yes" law. Basically a woman can initiate the entire encounter and it would still be rape.

I've read up on the MRA. They make some fair points. You would think the feminists would find common cause with them on some of them, such as equal parenting time, child support being out of whack, alimony being an outdated idea...

An ambassador for the welfare state.

Lincoln University President lays down some truth, gets attacked by feminists.

Lincoln University leadership transformed itself into an icon of failure as a result of the words of its president at an all-women’s convocation in September. His words became public this week.

“We have, we had, on this campus last semester three cases of young women who after having done whatever they did with young men and then it didn’t turn out the way they wanted it to turn out, guess what they did? They then went to Public Safety and said, ‘He raped me.’ “

And he was not done. He went on to say this:

“Don’t put yourself in a situation that would cause you to be trying to explain something that really needs no explanation had you not put yourself in that situation.”

Now, I am against rape, but I also don't believe that most consent in sexual encounters is explicit. In the moment the other person is reacting to you, it is implied. Knowing that a minimum of 25% of rape allegations are false (FBI Crime Lab Reports) and that is an absolute minimum, there is something to this man's words.

My main question is that since these women were using lies about rape to destroy the futures of these young men, why were they not summarily dismissed from the college, the same as the men would have been?

Stars outside of galaxies.
Generally, stars and planets are regarded as existing nicely within galaxies. We know that every now and again there are events that fling a star outside of the galaxy, doomed to wander the universe alone, but it was previously assumed to be relatively rare. A new study has indicated that rogue stars could make up as many as half of all stars in the universe. The research was led by Michael Zemcov of Caltech, and the paper was published in Science.

Just think, entire civilizations that may not see another star.

100,000 riot in Belgium

100,000 leftists refuse to accept the result of an election.

The truth about #gamergate.

Go to Page: 1