The Pointlessness Of Rape
you for your email.
The problem with MRAs devoting their energies to the rape statistics is
that - in practice - it does not make any real difference what the alleged
rape figures show.
1. In the climate that prevails - and will continue to prevail - these
figures will always be subject to gender politics, wooly definitions, virtually useless
'research' and - as the evidence shows quite clearly - downright lies and
2. The **general public** will **never** be able to get to grips with the
**truth** about rape on the basis of the **various** rape figures - and,
quite frankly, the same goes for MRAs; including myself.
Furthermore, the **truth** about rape will fluctuate with the changing
times and social conditions. In other words, one will never be able to pin
3. When arguing hither and thither about the rape figures with feminists,
with women, or with whoever; nothing is ever achieved. At best, and with
luck, one might be able to convince them that the rape figures are not
quite as high as they thought. (The same is true for all the other 'abuse'
figures.) But what does this achieve?
Whether the accepted figure is 50,000 or 500,000 there will be no
difference in the attitudes and beliefs of those who wish to further their
destructive anti-male agenda.
For example, in the case of child sexual abuse, the NSPCC knows from its
**own** data that fathers and child professionals are the least likely to
be the perpetrators, but this does not stop them from portraying these
very groups as the main perpetrators.
4. When it comes to abuse statistics, you are dealing with very
***powerful*** groups who lie, cheat and exaggerate; such as the NSPCC. But it is **they**
who have the power to capture the audience. As such, in practice, you will
never convince the **general public** that your 'minority' point of view
about 'the statistics' is valid.
Let me give you a parallel which might demonstrate better what I am trying
We know that women earn less in the workplace because of their choices.
But the message from some of the most powerful groups in the land is that
women are being discriminated against when it comes to their pay.
Now, ask yourself this question.
Is it better for MRAs to argue over whether women earn 78 cents for every
dollar that a man earns, or whether it is 85 cents, or 95 cents? Or is it
more fruitful to point out that, whatever the numbers might be, it
is **women's** choices that lead to them?
My point is that arguing the **alleged statistics** surrounding pay is far
less productive than pointing out why they might have arisen to be the way
that they are.
And I believe that the same is true when it comes to the rape figures.
Thus, for example, whether it is 85 cents on the dollar, or 98 cents, the
feminists will **still** manage to make a 'justifiable' fuss about it,
if they can convince the public that this is due to discrimination. But,
on the other hand, if the general public can be made to see that women's
choices lead to these figures, then no matter what the figures show
(85 cents or 98 cents) the dishonest feminist argument is scuppered.
I'll repeat that bit again; no matter what the figures show,
the dishonest feminist argument is scuppered.
And the same goes for the rape figures, in my view.
Whether it is 50,000 or 500,000 rapes per year will make no difference to
the attitudes out there.
What **does** make a difference in this case is telling people that, yes,
rape happens, but, as a man, I have no intention of being subjected to
highly prejudicial unjust laws, and I am not prepared to be continually
demonised over this matter, and, further, I will fight you all the way if
you continue to treat me as a fourth class citizen etc etc.
Take it from me; this approach works.
And **one** of the reasons that it works is that people who are
**demonstrably** unconcerned about what happens to **innocent** others
have lost the moral high ground; e.g. as pointed out in my piece Justice- Corrupt At The Very Core
... which, in a nutshell, points out that **ANY** person who thinks that
it is justifiable to harm ***innocent*** others immediately exposes
themselves to be unworthy, hypocritical and undeserving. And people who
find themselves in this position tend to back off very quickly.
About a year ago, I received an email from a UK feminist professor - whom
I had lobbied angrily because of an article in the Observer - who
pointed out - amongst other things - that whatever the truth about the
rape figures, even small numbers of rapes were unacceptable, and that
society had a duty to try to prevent them. I pointed out to her that if
this involved harming innocent men - such as my good self - then she could
not complain if people like me set out to harm people like her! After all,
she was no longer 'innocent'. Indeed, she was someone who advocated the
harming of innocent men!
Take it from me, this argument works, because the rape advocates have
nowhere to turn.
"You hurt me without justification, then I will seek to hurt you ***WITH***
In my view, the alleged statistics for rape and the manner in which they are calculated are useful activist tools only insofar as they can be demonstrated to be fraudulently produced and inflated. In other words, the numbers themselves - 50,000 or 500,000 - are far less important than is exposing the depths of dishonesty to which the feminist groups and others will sink in this matter in order to pursue their disgusting
agenda against men.
Thus, for example, exposing the fact that the official rape statistics in the UK are based **entirely** on the number of **allegations** of rape demonstrates just how
purposely misleading and, hence, dishonest are
government officials prepared to be.
These people clearly want to inflate the figures.
They want to deceive
And when people can see this,
their figures will be rendered meaningless, and they will also been seen
for the scumbags that they are.
A double victory!