Teach Men Not To Rape?

First of all your not a rape philosopher. You're a blasphemer. and hell becomes the likeness of heaven from the place of pain and grief a blasphemer who continues to sin is seated.

Your philosophy failed in this instance when you said, "This statement implies by it's premise that men are all rapists by their very nature who need to be trained otherwise." - that was 100% wrong. IN no way did it suggest ALL men. You've insulted me.

It implies lazy disrespectful drug addicts, date rappers, womanizers and ass holes. Men who during sex are abusive** (as a key example).

Blacks are better than faggots. Better than rapists. Better than drug addicts. And in fact, there is nothing wrong with being black. And I am the most racist person on the planet. I am the apocalypse.

Muslims are not terrorists. Atheists are terrorists, and account fro all criminal behaviour in the Middle East and terrorism on the globe. It is arrogant to suggest that a sinner is a part of any religion.

Jews are not cheap. they are frugal. and Judaism is a religion, not an ethnicity.

sure women are typically not good drivers. But they are fine drivers.

You are not a rape philosopher. or you would kill rapists only. and rape only the most slutty whores (not prostitutes) who **** womanizers and filthy rich ass holes.

you had failed philosophy class. miserably. and no sin is forgivable, for it is arrogant to be a sinner, for that is the denial of the Word of God, to ARROGANTLY neglect to acknowledge the flaws of your actions and the negative effects of your behaviour. Hell is worsened than hell itself for those who sin after condemnation.

Live to Kill rapists,
hate for imbecils,
Respect, Honor, Dignity
Christ is our Salvation.

There are a range of medications that can help you. Make an appointment with a psychiatrist. For the sake and benefit of humanity, get some help you lunatic.

I didn't know muslims were a race.

Technically jews are not a race either.

The only real racial stereotype he stated was the first one.

Regardless of them being racial or not he brings up a good point. Using this tactic that our society (supposedly) trains men to be rapists is absurd. When it comes down to it you have to clearly define what they are referring to by rape, it get's incredibly silly, like a man looking at a naked picture of a woman is considered rape. I've actually seen feminists make this argument.

When you use such a bizarre broad definition then you can see that they will come up with silly conclusions that become taglines and repeated so often it becomes a whole new thing.

It isn't about focusing solely on men or believing men as a group are all in need of being taught to not rape. I get that the simple stated approach "teaching men not to rape" can, on the surface, feel an accusation. That isn't the premise, it is just poorly titled.

I think (hope) violent rape being wrong is obvious to your average person. Violent offenders and their defenders have something broken inside. It wouldn't surprise me if the criminal actions of a rapist included crimes other than rape. Rape is only one way to disregard the personal boundaries of others.

Violent rape, when I speak of it, does not necessarily involve a previous association between the perp and victim and has no "grey area" where the victim or the perp might be confused about whether a crime is taking place. They both know its a crime. The perp does not care about breaking that law. The victim has no reason to believe saying no will stop the crime.

The "teach men not to rape" is a broader approach to teaching consent to everyone, not just men. If it might help, I'd suggest you see the focus on the word MEN in the same way I am told to read government documents -if it says all men are created equal, I (and all others) am to be included as a man on the subject. This would make "teach men not to rape" read as "teach all not to rape". It works because all need to learn what is and how to obtain consent. If you can't get on board with that, then I'd hope you're not also in the camp of believing there is no benefit or necessity for an equal rights movement today. If you can't get on board with reading "men" to include all, then all our government documents support a HUGE need for a continued effort towards feminism and all other movements with equal rights focus.

Consider a story I know to be truth:
Woman goes to a creative writing workshop. She is a single mother to a small child. The head instructor owns a small publishing house. The woman, in three sessions, receives positive feedback from many involved in the workshop and is suggested she sit down with the publisher running the workshop. She exchanges contact info with the publisher.
A few days later he contacts her to meet stating he is near her home and available that moment. It is late. She has put her small child to bed though she doesnt say so or even share that she has a child. He offers to meet in her home. She decides this might be a one time opportunity and invites him in.
Coming in, she notices he was dropped off rather than arriving alone but doesn't think much of it. The publisher quickly looks over some of her work and begins to get touchy feely. He is persistent, she grows aggitated. He gets aggravated and wonders aloud why she let him into her home if she wasn't interested in sex. He says "I guess I'll call my fellas...."
In that moment she has many fears come to the surface. What if he lets his friends come to the door? What if he leaves, gets to the car and they decide to return? She is poor; the front door is a weak lock and they can easily bust in. What if they wake the child? Can she know they'd not hurt her child? She, out of fear, offers her body up so he is appeased and more likely to leave satisfied.

Was that a story of rape? Many would say no. I say yes. I say perhaps if the publisher had been taught that sex is never implied by non sexual actions or that what he sees as implication is not that to everyone, he would not have felt misled. In not feeling misled, would not have grown aggitated when rebuffed. If he had not behaving aggitated, she would not have had reason to fear his next move and not had sex as an attempt to avoid further aggression.

Moments like the above are what "teaching men not to rape" is all about. Making it more clear to all what true consent looks like and what happens when not everyone has learned the definition of true consent.

This will be the first and last time I bother to acknowledge you even exist.

Nothing I say or share will ever be with you or your warped opinions in mind. Nothing I share will be an attempt to reach out or debate a subject with you. You, simply put, don't exist in my view in the same way the tiny mites living in the skin of humans do not exist in my view. I am aware they (and you) are there, but because it serves no benefit and cannot be changed, I don't pay them any attention or do anything in regard to them.

Hi Tetty. I hope you like it here. I think you will fit in real well.

Thanks

There's often people on these forums who have emotional problems. Ones who need support and advice.
You are not one of those. You are a dangerous and disturbed ******* lunatic. For ****'ssake, jump off a bridge before you lose control and hurt someone.

Think it's better to teach men 'if you rape, we'll cut your scrotum off. Do it again somehow and we'll cut your head off."

Only about 5% of rapists end up doing a single day in jail. Most aren't even reported to police let alone get prosecuted, found guilty, and sent to jail. Until that changes and we make executions the norm for such crimes it's going to continue unabated despite the occasional news segment about it.

I don't want to make light of the effect that any violent crime has on victims, but if America has proved anything, it's that harsher and harsher sentences have been a complete and spectacular failure in reducing the crime rate. I'm not suggesting releasing criminals, but any program focused solely on the punishment phase will increase the horrendous rate of prison population growth, fill your graveyards, and have zero effect on the rate of crime.

It was only a very short while ago that women were all virgins when they got married and there was no such thing as abortion and almost no such thing as divorce and children were born after marriage always with two parents.
The women certainly degenerated very rapidly.
And their Evil influence caused the complete collapse of any kind of Decent or Moral Society.
If they did not want Men to rape them, then perhaps they should have stayed as decent, moral citizens.
The work place has become completely inefficient and rude.
Women have had a hugely bad effect on the World and Society.
The rise of Evil that was in the Prophecies in the Religions, both East and West, which prophesied the rise of women and feminism, certainly was the Rise of Evil.