Thought Catalog

Trivializing Rape is Literally Rape, You Patriarchal Oppressors

  • 0

Over the years, I have unfortunately come to be highly acquainted with Social Justice Warriors (SJWs) – far-left extremists who populate sites like Tumblr and Twitter and whose batshit insane ideology has unfortunately permeated the mainstream left increasingly in recent times. SJWs are a perfect example of horseshoe theory, as they bear a striking resemblance to the far-right nutjobs whom they claim to hate. One could easily take an average SJW post railing against males/whites/heterosexuals/“cis scum”, replace any mention of those groups with mentions of Jews/blacks/gays/immigrants, and they’d have a typical neo-Nazi post (the main difference, of course, being that neo-Nazis tend to look positively civil and rational when compared to SJWs).

Unfortunately, in recent years, rabid Tumblr SJW-ism has become synonymous with feminism in general. Modern third-wave feminism takes its cues not from the suffragettes or from any other group of women who fought actual injustice, but from the likes of Andrea Dworkin and Valerie Solanas – nasty, vile, hate-filled women who made names for themselves by spewing venom and flinging bile to an extent that would make even Stormfront cringe. One hallmark of modern feminism is its glaring hypocrisy and there is no better example of this than in its treatment of the extremely delicate subject of rape.

tpes3xb
via Facebook.com

Modern-day Tumblr feminists will continually blather on about “rape culture” (a term that was originally used to describe the culture of rape in prisons, where such a thing actually exists) and constantly make claims about how western culture promotes, justifies, and trivializes rape. Since rapists are universally seen as the scum of the earth in western society, this claim is highly dubious at best. But it becomes downright absurd when one considers that feminists are the ones who trivialize rape more than anyone else.

yo2vemh
via Facebook.com

Feminists seek to continually expand the definition of “rape” so that it encompasses everything from nasty comments on the Internet to having consensual sex and later regretting it. One minute, they are relentlessly chiding people for using terms like “ear rape” and telling rape jokes. The next minute, they are labeling things “visual rape” and raving about how “discounting feelings” and withholding sex are forms of sexual violence.

consent
via Tumblr

It’s hard to imagine how one could possibly trivialize rape more than by seeking to expand the scope of what can be considered “rape” so that it includes all manner of minor infractions and meaningless nonsense. Likewise, I’d imagine that such a thing would be far more hurtful to actual rape victims than some talentless shock-humor comedian like Daniel Tosh making a lame rape joke.

dinosaur
via Tumblr

But modern feminists are not concerned with actual rape victims, just as they are not concerned with actual rape. They know very well that western society absolutely abhors rape, regardless of what they say. Feminists spend far more time discussing frivolous silliness like “rape culture” than they do discussing actual rape because they are fully aware that practically everyone in the west already shares their view that actual rape is abhorrent, whereas most people assuredly do not share their absurd view of what constitutes “rape”.

tt6tqpn
via Yahoo Answers

For people who devote so much of their energy to calling out anyone and anything whom they perceive as trivializing rape, feminists sure do a great job at doing exactly that. In fact, I’d be willing to once again say flat-out that nobody in our society trivializes rape more than feminists do. The comedians who tell rape jokes do so for shock value; the fact that society views rape as being extremely detestable is what makes it shocking to so many people in the first place. These comedians obviously do not actually endorse rape. But feminists are entirely serious in their crusades to expand the definition of “rape” so much that it becomes utterly meaningless. And nothing could possibly trivialize rape more than to turn rape into something with absolutely no meaning whatsoever.

jhtocbl
via deviantart.com

So, you might ask: what, exactly, constitutes “rape” according to modern-day feminism? Well, unfortunately, I do not have the room to list everything that these self-proclaimed crusaders of justice and equality consider to be “rape”. Whereas anyone who isn’t a completely brainwashed lunatic considers rape to be sex without consent, the modern-day feminist considers any perceived slight against them to be a form of rape. Two drunk people have sex? The man is a rapist. Porn? That’s rape since women apparently have no agency in modern-day feminism. Husky dog logos for sports teams? Yep, you better believe that’s promoting rape.

tbyjksa
via reddit.com

Modern-day feminism ironically sees women as nothing more than fragile, delicate, helpless, and pathetic little children in need of protection from everything at all times, as one can see from their continuing demands for “trigger warnings” which trivialize PTSD in much the same way that feminists love to trivialize rape. In addition, the modern feminist makes no distinction between words and action; Toni Morrison perfectly demonstrated this when she said: “Oppressive language does more than represent violence; it is violence.” “Virtual rape” and so forth sounds absurd to an average person, but perfectly legitimate to someone who considers speech and physical action to be one and the same.

xrj7q
via Tumblr

And, if you think that these sorts of people are limited solely to fringe corners of the Internet, then you would be sadly mistaken. Feminists have increasingly influenced actual legislation. “Facebook rape” can get you 10 years in jail in Ireland. New Zealand plans to change their rape law to reverse the burden of proof from the accuser to the accused so that, if accused of rape, one will have to prove innocence or be automatically found guilty, effectively making any sexual encounter a rape unless the defendant can absolutely prove that it was consensual (which can be outright impossible to do). California’s new rape law “requires affirmative consent to be ‘ongoing throughout the sexual activity,’ meaning that sexual partners must agree to each step of a sexual encounter as it progresses and consent can be revoked at any time.” And what do today’s feminists call this? Why, progress, of course.

How does this culture, particularly the men, react to the rape of women? As a rule, with hostility and vengeance. Often with insanity.

Men who rape, or who are imagined to have raped, have been lynched, shot, stabbed, beaten to death and to near death.

They are scorned and reviled by other men. Prosecutors make careers incarcerating rapists and often pursue their jobs with excessive zeal, punishing the innocent in the mindless pursuit of the guilty. All to great public satisfaction.

Even the mere accusation of rape, without evidence or corroboration, destroys reputations, careers, and invites violence against the accused. It is the one crime of which most men would fear being accused because of the horrific consequences it assures will visit their lives.

And you say we live in a rape culture?

You are fucking insane.

-Anonymous

But this is not progress. This is regression, and it’s a slap in the face to anyone who has ever had to experience the genuine horrors of actual rape. This is trivializing rape in the extreme and it does infinitely more damage than any juvenile frat boy comedian joking about rape could ever dream of doing. This is precisely the sort of thing which has made “feminism” into a bad word. And, do you know what? It deserves to be a bad word because this is sadly what feminism has become and it will remain a bad word for as long as this is how feminists choose to represent themselves. If you want feminists to be respected in modern society, then you have to be respectable first. One way to do this would be to stop your despicable trivialization of rape and to start focusing on helping actual rape victims. Until then, you modern third-wave feminists will continue to be seen as a fringe movement with very little to offer to people who actually care about women’s rights. TC mark

featured image – Melissa Brewer

This post originally appeared at MoonMetropolis.

Read This

More from Thought Catalog

Thought Catalog Videos


    • http://moonmetropolis.wordpress.com/2014/11/14/europe-never-learns/ Europe Never Learns | MoonMetropolis

      […] Likewise, Thailand (a country which also supposedly guarantees freedom of speech through its constitution) now justifies censorship by labeling all criticism of its government as “hate speech”. There is absolutely no objective criteria for determining what is “hate speech” and, if you’re convinced that society and the government are fundamentally racist, then the last thing that you want to do is to give those very same “racists” the power to silence certain speech since that power will be used to silence people like you and/or people that you support. When you give the government the power to silence speech that it deems worthy of being silenced, you are putting an incredible amount of blind faith in the very same government that, more than likely, you despise (and, even if you don’t despise the current government, there will undoubtedly be a government in the future that you despise, and that government will have the very same subjective censorship powers). It is very common for “human rights activists” to argue that “hate speech” is not merely speech, but a form of violence. This cheapens actual violence and harms victims of actual violence in much the same way that third-wave feminists labeling assorted things “rape” trivializes actual rape and harms a…. […]

    • https://thoughtcatalog.com/joshua-goldberg/2014/11/why-censoring-speech-creates-extremists-and-causes-atrocities-instead-of-stopping-them/ Why Censoring Speech Creates Extremists And Causes Atrocities Instead Of Stopping Them | Thought Catalog

      […] Likewise, Thailand (a country which also supposedly guarantees freedom of speech through its constitution) now justifies censorship by labeling all criticism of its government as “hate speech”. There is absolutely no objective criteria for determining what is “hate speech” and, if you’re convinced that society and the government are fundamentally racist, then the last thing that you want to do is to give those very same “racists” the power to silence certain speech since that power will be used to silence people like you and/or people that you support. When you give the government the power to silence speech that it deems worthy of being silenced, you are putting an incredible amount of blind faith in the very same government that, more than likely, you despise (and, even if you don’t despise the current government, there will undoubtedly be a government in the future that you despise, and that government will have the very same subjective censorship powers). It is very common for “human rights activists” to argue that “hate speech” is not merely speech, but a form of violence. This cheapens actual violence and harms victims of actual violence in much the same way that third-wave feminists labeling assorted things “rape” trivializes actual rape and harms actual ra…. […]

    • http://all.theglobalpoint.com/2014/11/why-censoring-speech-creates-extremists-and-causes-atrocities-instead-of-stopping-them/ Why Censoring Speech Creates Extremists And Causes Atrocities Instead Of Stopping Them | The Global Point

      […] Likewise, Thailand (a country which also supposedly guarantees freedom of speech through its constitution) now justifies censorship by labeling all criticism of its government as “hate speech”. There is absolutely no objective criteria for determining what is “hate speech” and, if you’re convinced that society and the government are fundamentally racist, then the last thing that you want to do is to give those very same “racists” the power to silence certain speech since that power will be used to silence people like you and/or people that you support. When you give the government the power to silence speech that it deems worthy of being silenced, you are putting an incredible amount of blind faith in the very same government that, more than likely, you despise (and, even if you don’t despise the current government, there will undoubtedly be a government in the future that you despise, and that government will have the very same subjective censorship powers). It is very common for “human rights activists” to argue that “hate speech” is not merely speech, but a form of violence. This cheapens actual violence and harms victims of actual violence in much the same way that third-wave feminists labeling assorted things “rape” trivializes actual rape and harms actual ra…. […]

    blog comments powered by Disqus