RSS Feed
February 11th, 2016 
Awake Goy By Greg Johnson | counter-currents.com
Ed comment: When we covered the press conference earlier this week. We wrote:
There are many different levels of criticism that is thrown around – perhaps some more valid than others.
Well, the below piece is just such valid criticism.
It’s clear that the media made the right accusation, BUT over the wrong material. The most recent accusation was clearly based on a lie and exaggerations. The truth must be recognized as the truth, but if they would have done their homework (like the mainstream media never does) then they would have found what Greg Johnson presents below:
Feminists have cried wolf! so often that I have gotten in the habit of ignoring them, so my first reaction to the recent campaign against Roosh V was just to dismiss it. The typical SJW is so indifferent to truth that it often seems that an important part of her brain has simply stopped working. But even a stopped clock is right twice a day, and sadly they are right about Roosh.
But first let me get something out of the way. Rooshs position in his much pilloried article How to Stop Rape is basically defensible. No, rape should not be legalized on private property. But if a woman invites a man to her place or accompanies a man to his place, then claims that she has been raped, it is very hard to prove such charges beyond a reasonable doubt. And the American legal system errs on the side of letting guilty people go free rather than on the side of convicting the innocent.
Feminists, however, are working to destroy the standard of reasonable doubt. They are creating a world where it is possible for a man to be arrested for rape which has devastating consequences whether he is convicted or not simply on the basis of an accusation that could never stand up in a properly conducted trial by jury.
Police, prosecutors, and judges need to stop pandering to feminists. Women need to know that accusations of rape in which there are obvious grounds for reasonable doubt will simply be ignored, and they need to act accordingly. Fewer women will be raped, fewer men will get away with rape because of reasonable doubt, STD and abortion rates will fall while marriage rates rise, fewer women will behave like sluts, and men like Roosh will get laid a whole lot less. In my book, those are all good things.
But still, Rooshs critics have a case. His enemies cite three passages from his sex tourist travelogues which fit the description of rape.
From Bang Poland:
I got down her bra and panties, but she kept saying, No! No!
I was so turned on by her beauty and petite figure that I told myself shes not walking out my door without getting fucked. At that moment I accepted the idea of getting locked up in a Polish prison to make it happen.
I put it in. I put her on her stomach and went deep, pounding her pussy like a pedophile.
Also from Bang Poland:
It took four hours and at least thirty repetitions of No, Roosh, No! until she allowed my penis to enter her vagina.
The sex was painful for her. I was only the second guy shed ever had sex with. . . . She whimpered like a wounded puppy dog the entire time, but I really wanted to have an orgasm, so I was almost there for about ten minutes.
After sex she sobbed for a good while, talking about how she had sinned in the eyes of God.
Sadly, even these girls could probably not get a conviction of rape beyond a reasonable doubt.
The most damning account is from his book Bang Iceland:
While walking to my place, I realized how drunk she was.
In America, having sex with her would have been rape, since she legally couldnt give her consent.
It didnt help matters that I was sober, but I cant say I cared or even hesitated. I wont rationalize my actions, but having sex is what I do.
What kind of man rapes a drunken girl without remorse because having sex is what I do? The proper emotional reaction to this is disgust.
When asked about this last passage in his February 6, 2015 press conference (transcript here), Roosh responded:
Female Reporter: . . . There are several instances in the Bang books where you recount having sex with women who were too drunk or incapacitated to consent. Now people reading that would certainly come away with the impression that you raped those women.
Roosh: I dont know anyone except for maybe you that thinks that, and people who have lost their minds when it comes to consensual sex. People who dont have any idea what girls are doing outside right now and what they will do in an hour or two once they get drunk and pick the guy that they like and let him do whatever he wants with her. So macho sex writing, to convert that to rape takes such a leap of faith that you have to be a liar to think thats true.
Female Reporter: You literally say that they were too incapacitated to consent.
Roosh: Macho sex writing is not a court. Its not a piece of evidence that you can Maybe some things I wanted to come across as an aggressive guy. Maybe I did. But just because there doesnt means that there is a victim out there and she suffered. Have I raped anyone? No.
Reporter: Is that fiction?
Roosh: No. Its not.
However, as my friend Seventh Son pointed out on The Daily Shoah (Episode 71, February 10, 2015), this is not a satisfactory response. Roosh faces a dilemma here, and the reporterette knows it. If he is telling the truth, he raped the girl. (It is rape in Iceland too.) And if macho sex writing just means Penthouse Letters-style fiction, then it casts doubt on the veracity of all of his sex travelogues, which function as testimonials to his pickup artistry. In short, Roosh is either a rapist or a fraud.
But even if Roosh is a fraud, he is no mere fraud. He is a fraud with a large audience that regards him as a role model. Even if he never raped anyone, one day one of his followers will. Does anyone seriously doubt that somewhere in the world, a woman has been (or will be) raped because of what some pussy nerd read in a book by Roosh V? Id bet money on it. And not even Rooshs most ardent supporters would take that bet. So it is not just feminist hysteria to describe Roosh as a rape advocate.
Roosh also argues that since no woman has accused him of rape, he has never raped anyone. But how do we even know that no charges have been filed against him? How would Roosh even know? Roosh was just a sex-tourist; he was just passing through; he could have used a false name or no name at all. There are probably quite a lot of Middle Eastern-looking John Does in open rape cases all over Europe, and it is only getting worse.
But thats just speculation. So lets just take Roosh at his word. Even so, his argument does not follow, because genuine rape victims might not come forward for a whole host of reasons: shame; lack of evidence; fear of reprisals; fear of a bad reputation; fear of losing a boyfriend, husband, or family; etc.
It pains me to write this, because I have long regarded Roosh V as something of an ally. No hes not a White Nationalist, because he is not white and does not identify as such. His father is Persian and his mother Armenian. But an ally is not one of us. He is someone with whom we share delimited common interests and with whom we can fight common enemies. The manosphere is part of the larger reactosphere. It performs an important red-pilling function on human biodiversity. And it shares a border with White Nationalism that is as long and porous and the US border with Mexico. Roosh, moreover, is highly intelligent; he has promoted Kevin MacDonalds The Culture of Critique to his readership; and in our limited email interactions, he has always been prompt, civil, and helpful. Beyond that, I despise moralistic ninnies and shit-stirrers who advance the premise that we cant cooperate politically with anyone if we wouldnt want to share a pup tent or take a shower with them.
But rape is rape, and all the red-pilling in the world does not change that.
Read the rest: counter-currents.com
Source Article from http://redicecreations.com/article.php?id=35255
Related posts:
Views: 0
Posted in 
Tags: 
