I held off giving my opinion on Roosh V and his followers until I did a little research, which is something the feminists that were in a rage over his meet-ups apparently failed to do. It didn’t take me all that long to realize the narrative being presented – Roosh V being a pro-rape creeper and holding pro-rape rallies – was slightly disingenuous at best.
An article Roosh wrote back in early 2015 titled How to Stop Rape was the main cause of the hysterical outrage displayed over the past few days. As he has stated time and time again, the article was obviously a “satirical thought experiment” not to be used as any reasonable guide for good public policy. I laughed at the idea that some apparently took his thoughts to be a literal endorsement or promotion of rape. If you assume the article to be completely literal, then you must also assume that he thinks the feminist writers at Huffingtonpost, Buzzfeed, and Salon are “professional journalists who pursue truth and justice over mass hysteria and delirium.”
Roosh even went back and wrote a disclaimer at the beginning of the article. He has also explained on many different occassions that his suggestion to “make rape legal if done on private property” was satirical. It was meant to get people thinking about the implications of women putting themselves in positions that are less than rational in terms of their safety. His article was an attempt to help reduce the possibility of women being raped, by encouraging them to think about actions that could put them in danger, not an endorsement of rape.
Of course, even if Roosh was serious, feminists seem to be missing a huge irony. They are taking a position against Roosh that is extremely hypocritical. They’re losing their minds over Roosh’s meet-ups, while continuing to ignore numerous obvious accounts of individuals that are much more likely to be a danger to women.
Yeah, We Love Hillary “Sweet Old Granny” Clinton
Hillary Clinton embracing a clinic that has had multiple employees caught giving advice on how to cover up underage prostitution is probably a good place to start, if your looking for someone to accuse of being pro-rape. There’s also the multiple incidents of her victim blaming and shaming, as well as the numerous accusations of rape and sexual assault against her husband, and the proven extramarital affair. Not to mention, she’s wildly hypocritical herself considering that she’s now come out and said all rape victims deserve to be believed.
Although, what’s probably even more concerning is the manner in which Hilary carried herself during an interview in 1980, concerning a case she onced argued as a defense attorney for an accused rapist. Everyone deserves a trial, so it could be argued that she did a noble thing by defending a man thought to be guilty. Although, when you see how she got the alleged rapist off and how she reacted to being ask about the case, it would be reasonable to conclude that she doesn’t care about the girl who was raped.
Believing her client was guilty, she had him take a polygraph test. She said, “I lost all trust in polygraphs after he passed,” presumably because she knew he was guilty. She laughed about this, and her laughter continued while discussing other details of the case. In the audio, Hillary Clinton seems strangely proud of getting a plea bargain for a man she believed to have raped a little girl. A plea bargain that made the rapist serve only 5 years. A rapist who had not only brutally raped the 12 year old, but also beat her so severely that the girl went into a coma.
According to the Daily Beast, Clinton even spread the accusation that the 12 year old was promiscuous, liked older men, and had falsely accused others of raping her. All of which the girl has denied. The Daily Beast and the girl could be the ones lying, but it seems just a little strange that feminists, who freaked out over Roosh V being “pro-rape,” are so forgiving and accepting of Hillary despite these accusations against her.
Who Are These Rapefugees You Speak Of?
Due to the massive influx of refugees attempting to escape Syria and Iraq during the year of 2015, Germany opened its door and graciously accepted about 1,000,000 of them into their country. This lax immigration policy is highly debated, and many German citizens believe their leaders made a huge mistake in allowing a large sum of immigrants to enter from countries densely populated with Muslims.
This type of immigration policy is what liberals and leftists in the West have been promoting since the civil war in Syria began producing refugees. They constantly praised European nations (such as Germany, Sweden, Greece, France, etc.) and leaders that carried out these policies, despite the negative consequences. Even when signs of disorder, violence, sexual assault, and rape began to appear, the liberal media, and third-wave feminists, ignored it. My only guess is that they hoped the situation on the ground would improve as these nations weeded out the good from the bad. But, things only got worse.
On New Year’s Eve, there was a long string of attacks on women, numbering around 100 or so, in Germany. Germany’s citizens, having finally had enough of their nonsensical immigration policies, began to attend massive protests. They even carried around signs referring to the Muslim attackers as “rapefugees.” The liberal news sites that immediately ran with the Roosh V story didn’t have all that much to say about the “rapefugees.” At least, not right at first. They did eventually warm up to it, but only because it became too big to ignore.
Doesn’t it seem that if they were going to encourage hysteria and applaud threats of violence against Roosh that they would be even more outraged and angry at the injustice we saw on New Year’s Eve in Germany? Isn’t mass rape more detrimental to women than someone who they believe to be pro-rape holding meet-ups for political and social discussion?
University Staffer Threatened Rape? So What…Weren’t They Pro-Life?
Then we have the situation that recently played out in a heated debate regarding abortion rights. Students and staff were clashing over a controversial pro-life poster. And at one point, a pro-abortion Purdue University staff member “did in fact offer to rape Tom’s wife/daughter/great grandmother.” Yes. That’s a direct quote from a comment by the Purdue employee, Jamie Newman. No, there wasn’t any outrage by feminists or calls by the left for him to be fired or kicked out of the country.
As Roosh explained in his so-called “pro-rape” article, the rape culture argument being pushed by feminists seems to largely center around women getting raped “by men they already know, especially at college.” This, according to these outraged feminists, would be accurate. In fact, the most prominent and well known cases of so-called rape culture are the accusations by the UVA chick, Mattress Girl, and Lena Dunham. All of these allegedly occurred on college campuses. Therefore, I am surprised to see that feminists haven’t taken much of an issue with this incident. I believe, with the standard set in the case of Roosh V, we could easily classify this man as a pro-rape creeper that will rape some unsuspecting defenseless college freshman – and their grandmother – any day now.
It seems that one day of meet-ups would be considered much less of a threat than an employee’s daily attendance on a University campus after having threatened to rape someone. But, I guess not.
So, is Roosh V pro- rape? Probably not. Is he a misogynistic pig? Maybe. So what?
Whether you believe Roosh to be pro-rape or misogynistic or both, or neither, the response to his meet-ups has undeniably been quite an over reaction. There are other more dangerous and influential individuals that have done and said things that should make us concerned about the safety of women. Roosh V is nowhere near the top of that list.