Why creationists can laugh at atheist feminists?

[pErvinalia]

Interestingly, this does seem to be an American centric thing. You only ever hear of American's complaining about this (other than outliers like Dodo). I recently had a debate with a Merkan on facebook on this very topic (although, it was centred more around free speech) and he brought up all the same things. Dave and you bring up the same things. Without you two (and this facebook Merkan) I would literally never have heard of any of these before. This just isn't a conversation that is happening in Australia. I don't know whether you've got a larger than normal proportion of loopy extreme feminists there compared to here (and Europe?), but that type of feminism is most definitely VERY fringe here.

[JimC]

Interestingly, this does seem to be an American centric thing. You only ever hear of American's complaining about this (other than outliers like Dodo). I recently had a debate with a Merkan on facebook on this very topic (although, it was centred more around free speech) and he brought up all the same things. Dave and you bring up the same things. Without you two (and this facebook Merkan) I would literally never have heard of any of these before. This just isn't a conversation that is happening in Australia. I don't know whether you've got a larger than normal proportion of loopy extreme feminists there compared to here (and Europe?), but that type of feminism is most definitely VERY fringe here.

Our shielas are bonzer!

[pErvinalia]

Our sheilas would fucking punch Dodo and Coito out. They don't need radical academic feminism.

[pErvinalia]

I need this t-shirt.

[Forty Two]

Interestingly, this does seem to be an American centric thing. You only ever hear of American's complaining about this (other than outliers like Dodo). I recently had a debate with a Merkan on facebook on this very topic (although, it was centred more around free speech) and he brought up all the same things. Dave and you bring up the same things. Without you two (and this facebook Merkan) I would literally never have heard of any of these before. This just isn't a conversation that is happening in Australia. I don't know whether you've got a larger than normal proportion of loopy extreme feminists there compared to here (and Europe?), but that type of feminism is most definitely VERY fringe here.

These are mainstream folks. And, if you read mainstream, leading feminist authors, they say the same crackpot stuff. They start out of one side of their mouth that it's just about equality, but then when they get into their goals and the details, it most certainly is not. It's bizarre, authoritarian, illiberal, and oppressive.

[Forty Two]

The radical element you and Dave rant about is.

Well, we just have a fundamental difference of view on that. One, I don't rant.

Bro...

You have no perspective or self-awareness.

[pErvinalia]

Do you realise the irony of you saying that??

[Brian Peacock]

Come off it rEv, feminists are all fucking crybully extremist harpies, and any bloke who doesn't agree is obviously a white guilt mangina faggot.

[pErvinalia]

Aint that the truth, Bruh!

[JimC]

Actually, I think most of the extreme feminist stuff is basically an example of a general trend for academic writers on social issues to adopt what has become a politically correct, somewhat left-authoritarian party line. Rather silly stuff, that certainly needs to be criticised where it drifts into the absurd. The fact that the authors will assert they are writing from the one and only, true feminist perspective don't make it so...

[laklak]

Fuck 'em with the broomstick they flew in on, that's my take on it. Really. Don't YOU fuck them. If they're the only thing left at 2 AM and last round's been called a blow job is marginally acceptable, but otherwise just keep it zipped.

[pErvinalia]

Most of them are lesbians anyway. They wouldn't fuck a man if you paid them..

[laklak]

They ain't met the Lakster, dude. Any one of them would gobble my gristle if she could get a look in.

[pErvinalia]

[Animavore]

No, he said exactly that.
]

For that reason, the law is only worth the paper it's written on if some of the critics' fears come true. Critics worry that colleges will fill with cases in which campus boards convict young men (and, occasionally, young women) of sexual assault for genuinely ambiguous situations. Sadly, that's necessary for the law's success. It's those cases — particularly the ones that feel genuinely unclear and maybe even unfair, the ones that become lore in frats and cautionary tales that fathers e-mail to their sons — that will convince men that they better Be Pretty Damn Sure.

The law is only worth the paper it is written on if campus boards convict people of sexual assault for genuinely ambiguous situations -- that's necessary for the law's success -- it's those cases -- PARTICULARLY the ones that feel genuinely unclear and even unfair -- that will convince men that they better be pretty damn sure.

I.e., it's the injustice that this law works that is its benefit -- it will scare the shit out of men in general so they act Pretty Damn Sure.

You're the one not getting it, Animavore.

Klein's logic is bizarre, and fascistic. Let's broaden the net so we get more arguably innocent people so everyone gets the fucking message, right? Give women a wiiiiiiiide berth...

And, I didn't say "written consent ONLY" I said verbal or written consent -- there are only two ways to get "affirmative consent" dude - verbally, or in writing. If the law requires the accused to demonstrate affirmative consent, then he has to testify either "here's the written consent form" or "she told me 'yes' out loud." What else is he going to say? All other evidence becomes irrelevant -- she was all over him? She was screaming out loud how horny she was as they walked out the door together? She jumped his bones in front of a room full of people and they made out like rabid dogs, then went to another room -- irrelevant. The only thing that's relevant is affirmative consent. If he has to show that, then he better have it in writing or on audiotape/videotape, or he's going to have a hard time proving she said what he says she said, isn't she?

That's like the other blurb I noted above, where the legislator was asked how a man was supposed to prove affirmative consent, and she answered "your guess is as good as mine." Fringe?

You're still adding in your own parts, and now what other people in other articles, have said in an attempt to create the crazy narrative you want.

I thought you were better than that Coito.