The Most Retarded Shit Ever!

A man is a rape-supporter if…

http://evebitfirst.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/a-man-is-a-rape-supporter-if/

-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.
-He defends the current legal definition of rape and/or opposes making consent a defense.
-He has accused a rape victim of having “buyer’s remorse” or wanting to get money from the man.
-He has blamed a woman for “putting herself in a situation” where she “could be” attacked.
-He has procured a prostitute.
-He characterizes prostitution as a “legitimate” “job” “choice” or defends men who purchase prostitutes.
-He has ever revealed he conceives of sex as fundamentally transactional.
-He has gone to a strip club.
-He is anti-abortion.
-He is pro-”choice” because he believes abortion access will make women more sexually available.
-He frames discussions of pornography in terms of “freedom of speech.”
-He watches pornography in which women are depicted.
-He watches any pornography in which sexual acts are depicted as a struggle for power or domination, regardless of whether women are present.
-He characterizes the self-sexualizing behavior of some women, such as wearing make-up or high heels, as evidence of women’s desire to “get” a man.
-He tells or laughs at jokes involving women being attacked, sexually “hoodwinked,” or sexually harassed.
-He expresses enjoyment of movies/musicals/TV shows/plays in which women are sexually demeaned or presented as sexual objects
-He mocks women who complain about sexual attacks, sexual harassment, street cat-calls, media depictions of women, or other forms of sexual objectification.
-He supports sexual “liberation” and claims women would have more sex with (more) men if society did not “inhibit” them.
-He states or implies that women who do not want to have sex with men are “inhibited,” “prudes,” “stuck-up,” “man-haters,” or psychologically ill.
-He argues that certain male behaviors towards women are “cultural” and therefore not legitimate subjects of feminist attention.
-He ever subordinates the interests of women in a given population to the interests of the men in that population, or proceeds in discussions as if the interests of the women are the same as the interests of the men.
-He promotes religious or philosophical views in which a woman’s physical/psychological/emotional/sexual well-being is subordinated to a man’s.
-He describes female anatomy in terms of penetration, or uses terms referencing the supposed “emptiness” of female anatomy when describing women.
-He defends the physical abuse of women on the grounds of “consent.”
-He defends the sexualization or sexual abuse of minor females on the grounds of “consent” or “willingness.”
-He promotes the idea that women as a class are happier or more fulfilled if they have children, or that they “should” have children.
-He argues that people (or just “men”) have sexual “needs.”
-He discusses the “types” of women he finds sexually appealing and/or attempts to demean women by telling them he does not find them sexually appealing.
-He sexually objectifies lesbians or lesbian sexual activity.
-He defends these actions by saying that some women also engage in them.

I say that if half of the parties involved were willing to have sex that's a 50% satisfaction and only half a rape. A real rape only occurs if both the man and the woman are forced to have sex together.

>>2
That's why a gangrape is, in every way, the best thing to do.
9 out of 10 involved people are willing to have sex, so 90% satisfaction.
Meaning there's only've been one tenth of a rape.

In a perfect world, there would be infinity people raping one woman, but then it gets tricky to organize the whole thing.

And about your real rape, does there exist porn of such thing? I'm interested.

Nothing wrong with gangrape. Many women actually fantasize about that kind of thing. There's an evolutionary reason for it.

>-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.

Looks like every time I've ever had sex it was rape then.

Awesome.

>>5 He has ever sexually engaged with any woman while she was underage.

We know which part your referring to!

What's emotional coercion?

"You love me and I love you, so let's fuck baby"

What about someone who has raped a woman? Would he count as a "rape supporter"?

>>8
It's not on the list, now, is it?

>>2
I was going to say something about 1/x tending to 0 as x tends to infinity, but >>3 was obviously faster.

>>1
-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.
Wait, so if a girl (consensually) sleeps with a drunk guy, she raped him?  And why is it that your answer changes when you switch the genders around?  Fucking retard.  Die in a fire.

-He has procured a prostitute.
-He characterizes prostitution as a “legitimate” “job” “choice” or defends men who purchase prostitutes.
Die in a fire.  You are a fucking idiot.

-He has gone to a strip club.
Not my thing, but how is it related?  Die in a fire.

-He frames discussions of pornography in terms of “freedom of speech.”
Die in a fire.

-He watches pornography in which women are depicted.
Die of a slow incurable disease.

-He watches any pornography in which sexual acts are depicted as a struggle for power or domination, regardless of whether women are present.
Die in a fire.

-He tells or laughs at jokes involving women being attacked, sexually “hoodwinked,” or sexually harassed.
Die in a fire, humourless piece of shit.

-He supports sexual “liberation” and claims women would have more sex with (more) men if society did not “inhibit” them.
Die in a fire.

-He promotes religious or philosophical views in which a woman’s physical/psychological/emotional/sexual well-being is subordinated to a man’s.
That's called heterosexuality.  It happens to be very common.  Die in a fire.

-He describes female anatomy in terms of penetration, or uses terms referencing the supposed “emptiness” of female anatomy when describing women.
Your head is empty and your claims vacuous of sense and logic.

-He defends the physical abuse of women on the grounds of “consent.”
You are retarded.  Die in a fire.

-He promotes the idea that women as a class are happier or more fulfilled if they have children, or that they “should” have children.
I agree that it's a bad thing, but it's unrelated to rape.  Die in a fire.

-He argues that people (or just “men”) have sexual “needs.”
I have a ``strong'' need to see you die in a fire.

-He discusses the “types” of women he finds sexually appealing and/or attempts to demean women by telling them he does not find them sexually appealing.
You are fat, ugly and annoying, and that drives men away, which frustrates you.  Sexist shithead.

-He sexually objectifies (...) lesbian sexual activity.
Excuse me... did... did you just string up words together and hope it makes sense?

>>8
The jury is still out that one.

>>1
Every time a man tells a rape joke, he is participating in and adding to a global ideology which states that sexual violence (and sexualizing violence) is normal, biological, acceptable, funny, or not that big of a deal.
How is that a valid implication?  Have you ever experienced being ,,rational'', ever?  Joking about a topic is strongly correlated with the ability to make proper, cold-blooded, rational judgement of that topic -- by admitting you cannot laugh at rape jokes, you are admitting your inability to deal with that topic rationally.  Fuck you and die, illogical free-speech-hating retard.

I identify as feminist and I fucking hate radical feminists.