UK Feminists Attack Barrister Because Of His Warnings About Rape Hysteria

A veteran of the English Criminal Bar was trashed in the UK press over a blog post he wrote about consent and rape. David Osborne, who has been practicing law since 1974, warned that recent reforms to the way police and prosectors handle rape cases (which I wrote about here) have “serious consequences for all involved in casual sex”:

For the past ten years or more, a politically driven agenda has been thrust down the throats of court users about the deplorably low percentage of rape allegations that lead to conviction.

The lawyer, who was pilloried by women’s groups, said the touted “deplorably low” conviction rate actually shows the system working as it should:

most of those accused of rape are acquitted, not simply as a result of the brilliance of my advocacy, but because the jury did not believe beyond a reasonable doubt that the victim did not consent.

Osborne, who had his age of 71 reported while his detractors didn’t, warned that trials in drunken consent cases will now to be pursued on the basis that the man must be guilty. He thinks the chief prosecutor behind the reforms

has decided, or rather it has been decided for her, that anybody who makes an allegation of rape must be believed, and everything possible in the trial process must be bent towards the conviction of the accused.

Rape campaigners took exception mostly to his outrageous plea in favour of female autonomy—a bête noire of gender hucksters:

I have always found it distasteful and unattractive the suggestion that as the victim was blind drunk she was therefore unable to give her consent to sex, or more to the point, she gave her consent which she would not have given had she been sober.  In my book, consent is consent, blind drunk or otherwise, and regret after the event cannot make it rape.

Trial by media

Obviously a publication dedicated to serious news and truth

Obviously a publication dedicated to serious news and truth

The left wing Mirror tabloid ran the story  on its front page. The feminist seat-warmers piling in to comment included Rape Crisis “spokeswoman” Katie Russell, who was outraged at Osborne over his

unwillingness and inability to grasp the simple legal principle that consent must be freely and fully given by someone with the capacity to do so, he has merely illustrated the desperate ongoing need for measures to improve the criminal justice system for sexual violence survivors.

With characteristic chutzpah, Russell calls women who have drunk sex with men and then retroactively withdraw their consent (which Osborne is obviously referring to) as “survivors.” She then ignores the substance of Osborne’s point, which is that a woman, contrary to what feminists claim, can consent whilst blind drunk. No mention is made either by her or by the Mirror, of the following passage from Osborne’s blog:

It is also right to add that the converse is true, namely that if a woman does not consent, blind drunk or otherwise, it would be rape if sexual intercourse takes place.  That is what the offence of rape is all about.

Osborne appeared on TV to defend his claims in a debate with the Mirror columnist Alison Philips, who relied on talking points about “vast number of rapes that happen every year” with “only a tiny number end up in a conviction.” She even engaged in outright False Rape Accusation denial:

There’s no way that men are falling prey to these women who are dressed in short skirts and getting drunk and then waking up and trying to say they didn’t consent. That’s absolute nonsense.

To his credit, and in comparison to the usual castrated capitulations of public figures when found in breach of prevalent moral dogma, Osborne has stuck to his guns. He did so in both his TV appearance and on his blog, where he warned again of a “real prospect of a miscarriage of justice if the prosecution are allowed to move the goalposts as Alison Saunders is suggesting.”

Moral neophilia and the myth of progress



There is little to be gained in further analysis of the wailings of the professionally aggrieved, who went for the old lawyer like hungry dogs. However, one particular meme stands out. Katie Russell of Rape Crisis, in the laboured prose of the socially maladjusted internet feminist, said in the Mirror:

On top of this, it is outrageous and depressing that someone practising law in the 21st century should be so unabashed about airing such baldly misogynistic and victim-blaming views.

Women Centre [sic] “national lead” Clare Jones hit a similar note:

It’s appalling. We are deeply shocked that even today, in 2015, someone can seriously suggest that the violent crime of rape could be provided with a complete defence if a woman was under the influence of alcohol or drugs at the time.

The Mirror also quotes a tweet response to Osborne’s TV appearance:

Rape is NEVER justfiable. What anyone wears/drinks is totally irrelevant. Such archaic views in 2015 is incredibly worrying.

The supposed obsolescence of existing morality is central tenet of the Social Justice mindset, which says: “your morality of is defective, and should be replaced with my new, improved version of it.” Historian Neil Cameron calls it “Moral Neophilia,” the epithet forming the title of his 2014 essay on Philip Rieff, a sociologist and scholar of Freud.

To Social Justice Warriors (SJWs), the rejection of existing values in favour of new ones, determined by SJW consensus as superior, is “progress.”

Reading Cameron’s summary, it seems Rieff argued civilisation to be underpinned by cultural interdicts, or taboos, which define what members of a civilisation are compelled to do. Rieff was against the 1960’s neo-Marxist “liberationism” which sought to scrap these interdicts. He framed the attacks on such cultural interdicts as “egoistic transgressions,” which, if they increase in scale and are not resisted, gradually usurp the old order. Sound familiar?

Rieff viewed transgressions against cultural norms as egoistic.

SJW’s during a die-in.

The Canadian historian explains how Rieff plotted western culture as a progression through archetypes—the classical political man, the religious man, the economic man, and the final archetype of the psychological man. Beyond ideals and illusions, the latter is “at best a narcissist, at worst a thug.”

His children, raised without repressions, regard all authority as illegitimate. For Rieff, these were the slogan-touting hippies and dropouts of the 1960s counterculture. In modern times, they are the Social Justice Warriors.

The SJWs who clog up the ranks of NGOs and government bodies continue to perpetrate transgressions against the cultural interdicts inherent in the legal system, e.g. the subversion of the “beyond reasonable doubt” standard of proof and criticising the police for investigating false rape accusers.

They wish to eradicate the common sense of experienced men like Osborne, who are hardened to sob stories of regret rape and the allure of trendy morals. The desired outcome is the penetration of SJW morality, of which Alison Saunders’ “rape myths” are an example, into common use. A solution to this dire predicament is found Cameron’s closing of his essay on the (distinctly unfashionable) Rieff:

Transgressions need to be resisted; otherwise they will destroy culture and civilization altogether.

Read More: It’s Time For A New Standard On Judging Rape Accusers

130 thoughts on “UK Feminists Attack Barrister Because Of His Warnings About Rape Hysteria”

  1. Stupid women.
    This barrister has been practicing law for over 40 years. Many of the women railing against him have barely been able to form an opinion for more than 5.

    1. That actually happened to me.
      I had to wait over 6 months to dump the cunt, set up the right situation where a rape would not be plausible.
      I seldom have nightmares but when I do, it was her coming back into my life and refusing to leave.

      1. I had a similar one as well. Only mine was a falsified abuse charge. She threatened to put me in jail unless I complied with her extortion demands.
        Now that bitch is 40, single and having a nervous breakdown.

      2. Cousin,went through similar. His ex claimed he barged through her house and punched her 6 times in the head. The cops(1 of them female) came busting into his house at 3 am and arrested right when they got the call. Had to pay $5000 to his lawyers to get him off. Despite the fact theres not a mark on her.
        To give a size comparison,shes a short 120lb while he a former juice head at 280lbs. She woulda at least had her face broken at the least,but 6 bare knuckle punches from him,shed be dead. He also said even though hes half white,the court sees a brown guy,you will have to work harder. Make sure you have a good lawyer. SInce its so hard to beat a white woman in court….espically if shes pretty or old. Being a young guy espically strong and ethnic is a shit hand.

        1. Im sorry. I have a disability, so I got blame all my life, for things not my fault. But its easier to hide, sometimes- than skin colour.
          So very hidden, how young boys of colour have to be taught, by loved ones that just BEING alive, can make them dead. Let alone rape issues.
          What will happen to all our boys, our beautiful boys?I could cry but Im too busy trying to go ERADICATE these EVIL lying trollops.

      1. Yes, we are. A little etymology for the word “hysteria,” which gives some insight into what our ancestors knew about women…

        1610s, from Latin hystericus “of the womb,” from Greek hysterikos “of the womb, suffering in the womb,” from hystera “womb” (see uterus). Originally defined as a neurotic condition peculiar to women and thought to be caused by a dysfunction of the uterus.

        1. there’s a movie about that and a guy in Victorian England who invented the dildo to ‘fuck’ the hysteria out of them… and apparently it worked….. ahahha

        2. Interesting, haha. Looks like this is it. Of course, they had to ruin it by presenting the men as rather stupid compared to the women, and interpolating a feminist sub-theme… typical Hollywood bullshit.

        3. I saw that movie. It’s hilarious, or rather, it’s hysterical. The movie ends with a sequence of shots including one of Queen Victoria opening up a box containing the contraption. In fact, if I’m not mistaken, the movie is called Hysteria.

        4. That’s so true that’s where the vibrator came from, clinics were around to treat women of hysteria apparently it worked – so its true women especially young women need regular sex to settle their brains. How many guys have worked with a group of women and realised the chicks not getting any were the ones most likely to behaving hysterically.

    2. If a woman can’t consent to sex when drunk, then all drink driving claims need to be withdrawn, as I can say I was too drunk to make a judgement call about getting in the car…. legal precedent is legal precedent….

      1. Yes, it makes no sense that a woman can consent to everything else while “drunk,” but not sex. Consent is consent. She decided to drink. Why is it the man can consent to sex while drunk, but a woman cannot? It’s sexist bullshit.

        1. and you cannot be drunk and disorderly, and i didn’t get into that bar fight by consent, I was drunk… in fact, a couple of lite beers and you can rob a bank, commit murder and do pretty much as you please….. “it wasn’t my fault, i never agreed to chop his head off with garden tools… i was drunk….”

        2. Good one and funny (see my comment) – I pretty much said the same thing, Ray.
          It’s getting out of hand. We’re letting 5 year olds pretty much do what they want……and, again, where is the equality that we were all “promised”?
          You have to fucking laugh at times.

        3. Plus,how dumb do you have to be not to think-hey, this might not be a good idea to be out of control of what Im doing???

        4. It is sexist bullshit. And the reality is if you’re a white, straight male on a college campus now a days, you have a good chance of getting slapped with a life altering — bogus — sexual assault allegation.
          I’d encourage everyone to look into just how absurd it’s become on college campuses. A female literally can claim some random dude “raped” her and she is given privacy, protection and cannot be questioned. The male accused is not allowed to know who the person is that made the accusation, have any “facts” to the case nor can cross-question the accuser. He cannot even present evidence which proves it’s a farce!
          Colleges now tell women not to go to police but come to the college because the reality is once a female has made an accusation on a male, that male will absolutely be “convicted” by the college. Sexist B.S. indeed. What we have are male hating college professors and administrators engaging in a modern day witch hunt to ruin the lives of young men.
          I encourage you all to look up cases. There’s many of them. Finally some of the guys are fighting back and suing the crap out of these school. Bankrupt these misandric centers!

      2. The reality is MEN need to start pulling the same BS.
        When a female makes a rape claim because she was drunk, the dude needs to claim he also didn’t consent/ couldn’t consent due to being bombed. MEN need to start working this BS. The media will of course mock the men but society will not. They’ll begin to see what’s really happening and talk about how absurd it is for one party to claim they can’t be held responsible do to self-intoxication when one can.
        Additionally … I don’t know why college age men don’t use Title IX and the sex assault laws to their advantage. They claim their cannot be discrimination based on gender yet the flat out discrimination against men in academia is utterly insane. Lawyer Up and sue to shit out of these colleges and the accuser. Enough with the endless special rights for women and men not fighting back.

      3. If a woman can’t consent to sex when drunk then she can’t consent to work when drunk. Bosses should make all women blow in the breathalyser before allowing them into the work place and send them home if they fail.

    3. This kind of shit is getting ridiculous. I’m wondering where is the equality in all of these statements made by these women (I haven’t heard one of them, yet, mention it).
      What’s next? We’re going to let women drive drunk, commit murder, rob banks or other criminal activity and then let them off because they we’re drunk (because they didn’t know what they were doing at the time)?
      That’s how we treat 5 year olds and it’s why they don’t have the same authority, as well as rights, as the adults.

      1. You know it. As early feminist Betty Friedan once remarked, feminists like Gloria Steinem were “female chauvinist boors” trying to “elevate women as a separate class.” It really never was about equality. Ever. The average person is so stupid they’ll believe any kind of rhetoric if they hear it enough.
        Feminists are already arguing that women should NOT have to go to prison for their crimes. Of course, men are still required to.

      2. Well done!Yes, its a hysteria of females who can’t handle their idea that the world might not be a nice safe place all the time,where they can have no guilt over their own infantilzation, by their own hand.

        1. Women (feminists) are going to be in much trouble in the coming years. They’ve complained so loudly and for so long about how they’ve been “so wronged” over the years. Now, they have to live up to the bullshit that they’ve preached about in this equality nonsense. It’s getting to the point where you’re (the man) asking them….”what about the equality?”…and they have no answer. They’ve been brainwashed into thinking it was about equality but no…it was about power and control. Many women (and some men) are looking very stupid at this point in history.
          They are having to answer for this nonsense and they don’t know what to say (because they’ve been fooled).

    4. just label them. Women can be the most crude and mean spiritied. But they dont want to hurt their rep so they play passive aggressive and save face. So racist sexist homophobia will make her back pedal…even if she is one. But no one calls her misandrist or man hater and shames her for it, so shell act on it.
      false accuser same thing come up with a term like crying wolf or whatever and shame it.

    5. Ive heard this from someone. I also heard the poor guys story.
      I wanted to beat the crap out of her. The lying.

  2. I’m no fan of modern English women, but the next time I’m in London, if I slip on a crack on the sidewalk and fall and accidentally have sex with Kate Middleton, it wouldn’t bother me overly much. Sure, she may be the epitome of the definition of hypergamy (how much higher on the beta-bux ladder could you get than her dough faced feminist mumbling prince?), but I’d still give her a whirl just for kicks.
    According to the article though, I’d better be sure she hadn’t consumed a martini before she went out walking on the sidewalk in front of me.

    1. British women. They want to marry the prince. They want to get play raped by an american billionaire in his red room of pain.

  3. He knows laws must be based on reason, not emotion. The only question is how many innocent men will have their lives ruined before people comes to their senses again. It’s Salem Witch Trials logic all over again. Women can now have men thrown into jail, and reputation ruined just by speaking a few words. Exactly what feminists want.

    1. Good point. The best move here would be to use “equality” as a defense against it. We were beaten over the head for decades about equality, fairness, rights, etc….so where is this equality?
      More men pushing back with this defense will eventually put the whole thing on its ass. You can’t have both preferential treatment and equality as your “foundation”. I’ll call bullshit…every time.

    2. That is why any man should go have a look at DeadBrokeDads, by Peter Nolan, also on Twitter EqualB4Law(same.)

  4. This is rather a good article, which provides some much needed theory to support the ‘what is to be done’ task we all face to today, namely the need to critique the critique, or rather to rip to shreds and expose its paper thin arguments. I’ve yet to check out the Rieff / Cameron but the focus on ‘repression’ and ‘progress’ are two obvious and necessary targets. Firstly the idea of ‘repression’ is closely linked to ‘oppression at the critical point of ‘cultural marxist’ / Frankfurt school theory – and is arguably based on dubious, wrong, and wholly discredited (neo-freudian theory. The strange thing though is the other side of overcoming sexual repression has been repressive SJW puritanism – which goes to show how vacuous and selectively applied the idea was all along: namely to liberate every sick urge in Pandora’s box but the ones we were born with.
    The ‘progress’ meme is probably more important though. Countering this is tricky because progress in the modern mindset is a self-evident good, a concept / word with positive connotations, which if one opposes it may make one seem backward or ‘reactionary’ (I’ve never thought neo-reactionary for instance had the right sales-pitch). Better to expose the vacuousness of the SJW idea of progress – chip away at the underlying marxist historicism; and subvert their reasoning: point out for instance that increasing the number of men in jail on the basis of almost certainly flawed and unsafe convictions when they already outnumber women between 10 or 20 to 1 is going to increase repression / oppression, is going to make society less liberal, and less progressive, and above all will do so on the basis of infantilising women, which is what feminism has always done.
    In other words always subvert SJW meanings rather than oppose them directly. These are stupid people, wielding weapons that are blunt in their hands. Moreover in nearly every forum where this issue is discussed – even in places like the guardian, there is a groundswell of scepticism that can be stoked and channelled. When even the majority of lefties are worried, and feminist mouthpieces have to resort to cheap heckling as above then its only a matter of time when the edifice comes crashing down. Turn them into a liability that they truly are. They are political poison in the making.

    1. So what?
      You guys, as in regular guys who go to a bar, pick up a girl after a few drinks and have sex? Those guys?

      1. Im close to 50, my son is 15. I feel bad for him as the law is being stacked against him as a predator for no real reason.
        In my 50 years, i have seen women use the “threat narrative” more often for personal gain than because of an actual “threat”.
        The “threat narrative” for personal gain is becoming institutionalized and not scrutinized.

        1. Indeed. It is one of many forms of authoritarianism that is being foisted upon men and the population in general. What is so disturbing is how willingly blind so many individuals are of this threat.

        2. Women have no imperative to care about men. I would like to see a single documented case where women actually promoted or supported something just “for” men. Just one thing.

        3. It’s been Open Season on men and boys for decades in New Amerika, and in the Anglosphere. It’s not just blowing the Rape Whistle constantly, either. It’s across-the-board in both the civil and criminal systems. Modern females are experts at pretending they are Under Threat From An Evil Male, and all of government (etc.) is now incentivized to enable and enforce their every Holy Word.
          Any accusation against any male is a PLUS. Even when they escape being tossed into Mammy’s Mancages, the hassle you are put through makes the point of Katie Russell and her neo-fascists — if you do, say, or think anything that Katie and the SSisterhood don’t like, or makes them Feel Bad, well, you deserve your beatdown. You’ll hear The Knock at your door shortly! Oh and innocence is no defense. Truth, facts, and reality are no defense. All that matters is Kutie Katie’s endless screeching accusations, and the thrill of vengeance she gets when she screws over your life so that she, the SSisterhood, and their punkboys can pocket some more blood-dollars and feel good about themselves. Doing their jobs. Having their careers.
          There is no stopping Katie and the Krew. The nations do their malevolent will, and they know it too. Only the complete destruction of masculinity and fatherhood will stop Katie and the Krew — although it will result in her own destruction, as well. But the hate of the SSisterhood — and the cowardice and greed of their male enablers — is far more important than mere civilization. Because ME ME ME! Katie is sick in her heart and mind, and so everybody else is going to suffer for it too. Cause that’s the ONLY thing that really makes Katie and the millions like her happy. Only male tears and blood fulfill them, now.

        4. Isn’t that the truth…been watching it for decades, myself. The funniest part of the whole thing is watching these women go from ‘equality’ (where we are all equal) to power and control (which is what they were really after from the start).
          The best argument, now (for men), would be to use equality to beat women at their own game. The bullshit, for years, was nothing but “let’s all be equal”…and we’re seeing it was a joke.

  5. Its about the legal definition of “drunk”. If 110 pound woman has 2 drinks she might get cited for driving under the influence of alcohol. Does that mean she can claim rape the next morning if she has regrets? What is “drunk”? Anything more than 1 drink? How is the man supposed to know how much the woman has consumed? Its not a rhetorical question. Men need to know if they are to be able to comply with the changing law.

    1. “How is the man supposed to know how much the woman has consumed?”
      He isn’t.
      “Men need to know if they are to be able to comply with the changing law.”
      Men are not supposed to be able to comply with the law. It is being constructed in such a way that by merely attempting to comply, they lose.
      There are no rules you can play by. You are trapped in a giant game of fizbin, and the sooner you get used to the idea, the better your odds of surviving the next 20 years.

    2. Before Internet, in men’s magazines such as Playboy, many men admitted when they took a hot one home, they went to sleep. In the morning, when all their neurons were firing, they ate a casual breakfast, then f****d each other blind. Said it was much better that way than when they were tired and half or more drunk.

  6. There is a rape culture and a rape crisis so taking action by staging a “die-in” is sooooooooo important. . . Let me just check my phone.

    1. just checked my fone actually- the topic of the day on FB is “I want a beagle!” (a beagle just won best in show). One woman wanted a pup from the actual winning pooch- not sure if she was serious

  7. What is important now is for others to stand by him and support him vocally. Otherwise, he is just going to be drowned out by the feminist and SJW voices and dismissed as an old misogynist, which in turn will discourage even more people to speak out.

  8. If a woman can get blind drunk and: consent to drive, kill someone and be held accountable; consent to attack someone and be held accountable; consent to a drunken online shopping binge and be held accountable for her bill; consent to buy a slice of pizza during her drunk walk home and be expected to pay her bill; consent to a cab ride and be held accountable for her fare; then, I see no reason women should not be able to consent to sex while drunk, and be held to that choice. Women are either adults, accountable for their actions, or children in need of patriarchial protection. They cannot be both.

    1. I could see this as part of a summing up speech for a successful defence trial.
      One thing that could be added potentially: if women are not accountable whilst drunk, they are also not responsible while drunk. In other words every single mum who gets drunk while in charge of her kids should be prosecuted – a father on the hand would have no such problem.

      1. Unfortunately, to most of the mouth breathing morons on the average jury, this is meaningless because rape feelings > logic.

      2. wonder what happens if the man claimed to be drunk too…. then obviously he didn’t consent to have sex… so must be two drunk people both raping each other in some weird twisted alcohol fantasy …. shit i better check out the local liquor store, i didn’t know the stuff was so potent….

        1. Right. I can’t wait to use the “equality” defense in this situation. Didn’t they say we’re all equal…so everyone is blameless under these circumstances.
          I fucking love it.

        2. if the man also made such a claim (of rape by virtue of having been drunk) he’d probably have to do so before she did, or at the same time (they could share a cab on the way to the police station I guess). I imagine the law assumes one party had to be the aggressor rather than both. Rape is still oriented around traditional penetrative sex, but if she say started performing sex acts on him before they proceeded to full sex, then arguably she would be the aggressor. I doubt that’s how it play out though

        3. I imagine the law assumes one party had to be the aggressor rather than both.

          Sadly, depending on jurisdiction, that may not be the case. Look up “statutory rape”.

        4. as far as I can tell ‘statutory rape’ seems to refer (exclusively?) to cases where one party is under age, or possibly mentally incapacitated. The latter doesn’t seem to be clear though, and doesn’t seem to apply where one say the woman was “too drunk to consent” i.e. the latter would still be rape under new laws but not ‘statutory’ I don’t think

        5. When both are underage, both can be considered rapists (depending on the jurisdiction). There’s your precedent.

    2. i was drunk, i didn’t mean to put a brick through the jewerly store window and take 5 Rolexes….. sorry they already got sold on ebay now…..

    3. Right. We now need to “babysit” these adults (women) because it’s obvious that we are not all ‘equal’.

  9. I’m sure Katie Russell would agree that if I’m driving drunk then I can’t be held responsible for my choices. I mean, if I were to cause a car accident, while drunk, I obviously don’t have the agency necessary to be tried and convicted. Moreover, I’m sure that she’ll agree any robbery or murder committed by someone who is drunk are not fair game for prosecution. After all, they wouldn’t have done it sober.
    This is the problem with the “being drunk negates consent” idea. The only time, and gender, it’s applicable to is when a woman decides she didn’t like the sex the next day.
    Assuming the woman is conscious, being drunk does not negate consent. Guys are taught drunk sex you regret is your own stupid fault. You bear the consequences from it no matter what, including a kid, even if the woman was stone cold sober. Women are taught drunk sex you regret is rape and that it isn’t their precious little fault. A ridiculous double standard that reduces women to children who are allowed to get drunk and absolve themselves of the consequences they don’t like.

  10. Gentlemen, the most radical forms of feminism have reached the highest strata of power. Any man who still upholds equal rights for women deserves to be false accused of rape and rot in jail based on the very laws that have been passed by giving women the rights to pass them.
    This case is especially interesting: The guy even tried to make sure he doesn’t rape her and was even so friendly to keep the car clean. She even gave her phone number afterwards:

  11. I find it ironic that as women are granted ever more freedoms, their ability to use them decline, as their inability to police themselves becomes ever more obvious.
    Freedom to choose to work – has become an obligation to work.
    Freedom to divorce – has resulted in a lower likelihood of ever marrying.
    Monopoly of reproductive rights – less likelihood of ever becoming a mother.
    Freedom to choose their path in life – 25% of US women in their 40s and 50s on psychiatric meds.
    Freedom to support themselves – 28 million US women on food stamps.
    And now, freedom to have consequence free drunken sex – less men willing to sex women up.
    Feminism is increasingly restricting women’s choices.
    Like a traditional patriarchal chaperone, but without a cock, common sense or accountability.

    1. Women do not realise what useful fools they have become. The “need to work” for their self worth bullshit philosophy. By having both sexes working the government get twice as much tax to burn on all the moochin single mothers, social welfare recipients, their own salaries and any other bullshit ideas they come up with.

  12. No body told the people at the die-in that you won’t be able to use your smart phone when you’re dead?

  13. Rape is a body issue that women use to leverage victimhood – just like abortion, public breastfeeding, fat acceptance, gender identity, contraception, “topless rights” and other unimportant things.
    It should be assumed by default that any discourse on the above issues are first and foremost motivated by political interests, not the actual problem itself. Viewed from that lens, the discussion of rape does not merit any more attention than crime in general, and should rather be analyzed with great skepticism.

  14. I have been making a certain point for years that has definitely offended many:
    If a girl goes to a booze driven social gathering dressed as a slut, blacks out, and ditches her group… what does she expect to happen? It’s like a person dressed in black crossing an interstate at dark not expecting to be hit.
    Girls have this mindset now that they can’t be held accountable for things that they do while drunk. Only problem is they can still receive a public urination citation… so why can’t they own up to other actions and decisions?

    1. Only problem is they can still receive a public urination citation..

      You can bet that this will be the next instance of “oppression” they will push to shoot down in the near future…

  15. This is interesting although slightly off topic: Student banned by his college from being going anywhere near a fellow student who thinks he looks a bit like her rapist. The rape (alleged or otherwise) happened thousands of miles away it seems.!eaURur

  16. You don’t even need to rape people anymore to be called a rapist by the feminists… Nerds in Gamergate who probably never touched a woman in years are labelled rapists even if there is no evidence whatsoever that they ever committed a single rape.

      1. They are really depreciate the power of the word rape. Rape to me means being penetrated beyond your will. Receiving messages from internet trolls, or people making sexual comments to you is NOT rape and never was. Neither is watching porn or sexy female characters in the medias.

  17. The funny thing is that the biggest rapists are usually the third-world immigrants that the leftist feminists so vehemently defend. But they exclusively go against white men.

  18. According to feminists a woman is absolved of all responsibility when she has an alcoholic beverage. However everyone else still retains not only responsibility for their own actions, but responsibility for hers as well. It’s the most vile popular philosophy these days.

  19. I cannot understand why if a drunk man and drunk women have sex, how the man can be guilty of rape, if drunk people cannot consent to sex? If a man is drunk and a woman accuses him of rape, couldn’t he just accuse back and say I was too drunk to consent to sex, so if it occurred she must have raped me when I was drunk?

    1. Getting drunk to the point where your judgement is impaired is consent to everything that happens to you while you are drunk that unimpaired judgement would have prevented.
      Sorry, it is reality check. If you get drunk and wrap your car around a tree, you caused the accident. If you get drunk and involved in a fistfight, you got involved in a fistfight. If you get drunk and fuck some guy or let him fuck you, you fucked him. If you got drunk until you passed out, you are responsible for getting robbed, rolled, or raped.
      Liquor is not roofies. No one forced you to drink.

      1. Contrary to popular belief. Roofie use is low. And hard to find. “Roofie Rape” is just 90% bullshit.

        1. Right…I’ve never once been offered roofies in my life, and I have known far too many drug dealers for that to be a coincidence

  20. Ditto for “harassment.” The exact same conduct from someone highly ranked is welcomed. If someone she feels is not a winner behaves that way “he accosted me”. Since the standard is subjective (in the female mind and some males are considered “winners” by some females and the same guy is a loser by another) the entire legal claims process is skewed. Also “rape” sure I blew him because I wanted to “at the time” but my friends told me he is not the guy I thought he was (or that he led me to “believe”) so now I regret it and will file a claim because of what that “creep did to me.” Thanks prosecutor for understanding me. Go get hi, Oh, you lawyers have some real power, you can throw other guys in jail, Oh, prosecutor boy, you are awfully cute can I suck you PLEASE.

  21. What Ifind ironic is the ‘common wisdom’ that “The number of rape cases that go unreported or unprosecuted far exceed the number of false rape accusations.”
    I have heard this bit of tripe dozens of times… and yet, there is evidence for false rape accusations, and NO evidence for ‘unreported rapes’. So, essentially anyone that spouts this line is, literally, inventing it… It is a flat out lie, with no evidence to back it up whatsoever.
    And yet these dipshits believe it as much as any terrorist believes blowing himself up will net him 60 virgins.

      1. ….70, in reality that won’t happen since both heaven and earth will be moved out of place and so the new heaven and the new earth will be one…and we will be like the angels meaning no sex no game needed just perfection. Revelation explains it best.

  22. Wow, that’s rather Victorian of UK women, demonizing their own men, at the level of Arhturian Englishwomen that Quisling’d FOR THE VIKINGS.
    “Up next: Church of England designates Gwenhwyfar as patron saint AND paragon of British womanhood.”

  23. And how is a man supposed to judge the sobriety of a woman, or ascertain if she is sober enough to give legitimate consent.
    Things have almost reached the point where a man has to keep a CCTV and an alcohol breathalizer outside his door. So you can prove you correctly judged that a woman was sober. And then another CCTV in your bedroom to record getting consent at every stage of the undressing, touching, and intercourse.
    And even then, you run the risk that she will have consent-regret, rock to the police station, and claim rape. At which point you will be arrested, spend thousands on lawyers, lose half your friends, and probably be fired from your job on the modern assumtion that an accusation means guilt, (even if the courts can’t prove it).

  24. When I get drunk I can hardly get it up anyhow so how are all these guys getting drunk having erections? Maybe they are made of sterner stuff than I…. after a point of drunkenness I loose all interest in getting laid. The next morning is another matter altogether….I’m horny as fuck….I would go all day. She’s usually sobered up by that stage also……

    1. Really worth a watch and pretty much on point for this topic from an unlikely source!:promise it won’t disappoint.

  25. What happens if two lesbians go out and have sex after drinking? Who raped who? Or should they both be prosecuted for raping each other?

    1. In my activist years, 1984 to 1993, people sent me things. Someone supplied internal documents from the Woman’s Resource Action Center at Lesbian U. (the 80’s nickname for our State university) to an underground campus newsletter, which someone sent to me. it showed that around 1/3 of all lesbians have been forced to have sex against their will, by another lesbian. Lesbians also have the highest domestic violence rate of any identifiable group, even higher than law enforcement people.

  26. More rape bullshit. More reason to avoid bars. And the UK. Sorry Brits. Americas not buch better anyway.

  27. I guess I’ve been the ‘victim’ of Rape™. I was at a college bar when I was 21. I was at least 10 beers in when a women, who claimed to be 42, came up and started dancing with me. She ended up buying me more drinks ($6 Heineken instead of my usual $3 Bud Lights) and then she drove me back to my place where we fucked. I woke to take a piss in the morning with a splitting hang over. I noticed that I didn’t hear the sound of the piss hitting the water. When I looked down I saw that I had passed out with the condom still on and it was filling up like a piss water balloon. My bang bitch and I parted ways and I never saw her again. This was in 2004.
    If I was an Americunt who fucked a 42 year old man who feed me drinks all night, I’d no doubt be crying rape. As a man, I simply laughed it off and told my friends “Brah, I got so fucked up and banged a MILF”. Being white and having a penis means that I take responsibility for my own actions.

  28. If I were ever falsely accused of rape I’d go full retarded in court and start making up really fucked up shit. Won’t help the case, just will be amusing. e.g. Tell the whole court (and her parents, who are sitting, supporting their innocent little angel) that she told you her Dad once stuck his finger in her anus when she was 6, so maybe that has something to do with it. Or that she was asking for you to fist her but you didn’t want to. Or that she asked you to shit on her breasts but you thought that was not too appealing. Or that she wanked your dog in front of you as a joke. Or that… I could go on. It would be amusing.

  29. the way its going rape is going to rise. whether by the court rulings of false rape charges or just men deciding that its a lot easier to really rape than to go through the pick up and lay just to run the risk of a girl crying rape the next morning or the next month or year or decade even.

  30. Nobody questions that getting shitfaced will impair your ability to make good decisions. However, there is again a double standard on the implications of that. Men are held responsible for bad decisions while drunk on the basis that they chose to get drunk in the first place. The only exception is if they drunk to the point of automatism. (I’m referring to Canadian law here.) That court decision that left open the possibility that a drunk guy could escape a rape charge outraged feminists.
    On the other hand, women don’t have to be unconscious or automatons to successfully claim that they did not give consent. There is this huge grey area from being “a bit tipsy” to being “blind drunk” where it will get argued that they could not consent. The thing is, nobody really knows where that line is. If you charge someone with DUI they need to blow over .05 or .08 to be impaired, but a woman claiming rape will almost never take a breathalyzer and then plays up how much she had to drink.

  31. As much as I hate having to align myself on here with perma-virgins, the embittered and people who idealise a make-believe world of the 1950s that never even existed, when the legal system starts to overturn ‘the innocent until proven guilty’ principle, I have to stand against it.

    The main way feminist pressure groups have successfully pushed for – Unprecedented, Accuser-Biased, Date Rape Laws – is by their constant and loud assertion… “No women would ever lie about being raped“. Amazingly, this assertion is now universally accepted, by our media and politicians as true. I say amazingly because the evidence to the contrary is so easily found. Here is just a small fraction of what’s out there …
    KELLY-ANN FERGUSON, told police that her husband of raped her but after being shown a video taken by her husband, she admitted to police that she had made up the story because he wanted to separate from her.
    MISS ROBIN LEVITSKI, had accused a man of raping her but finally admitted… “the entire story was fabricated” after police had shown her video evidence which contradicted her story.
    CHANEYA KELLY, whose testimony jailed her own Navy Veteran father for 20-40 years for rape, now says she was “coerced by her mother to lie about the charges”.
    “IDENTITY PROTECTED” Female, accuses police officer of sexual assault on camera but is then forced to confess that she lied when she is shown footage from the officers car camera.
    NICOLE RICHESS, finally pleaded guilty to making false rape allegations against two soldiers because she “did not want to admit she had been unfaithful to her boyfriend” ;
    WANETTA GIBSON, now admits, she Falsely Accused Football Star of Rape – He Receives Five Years In Prison, She Receives $1.5 Million of Taxpayers’ Money;
    NATASHA FOSTER, now admits that she “lied to police about being raped” has finally pleaded guilty to a charge of perverting the course of justice;
    KATELYN WEBSTER, now say she lied about being raped, because she “didn’t want to get into trouble with her father for having sucker bites”
    REBECCA HOWARD,now admits to making false rape claims against two innocent men;
    “IDENTITY PROTECTED” Female, had a Man locked up for ten years for rape, but finally came forward and admitted to police that she and her witness had “lied about the rapes”.
    KIMBERLEY WHEELHOUSE now admits to making false rape claims against two men, after attending a house for “arranged sex”.
    PHILIPA COSTELLO, had claimed she was raped but later admitted “lying to police” about the incident and pleaded guilty to “perverting the course of justice”
    “IDENTITY PROTECTED” Woman, now admits to making a false rape allegation against a male student, but will not be charged. “Our focus is towards support and care for her,’’said university police chief Pete Andrers;
    “IDENTITY PROTECTED” Female, now admits her “rape claim was false” but will not face prosecution;
    JOANIE FAIRCLOTH, now says… the statements she made to police about being raped by Conor Oberstare were “100% false”
    ANN-MARIE GOUGH, finally admitted to lying over rape claim against two men in car;
    “IDENTITY PROTECTED” Female student, reported a sexual assault in the Texas Tech Student Recreation Centre, but has now admitted her “statements were false”.
    BILLIE JO EADS, now admits to making a false rape claim to police against an innocent man;
    CHARMAINE RIPLEY, claimed she’d been raped in a park, but finally admitted wasting police time;
    “IDENTITY PROTECTED” female, admitted putting an innocent man behind bars by “falsely accusing him” of rape because she was afraid of what her boyfriend would do when he found out she had cheated on him;
    SUSAN BRADLY, had accused two men of raping her but now admits “the attack never took place”.
    MICHELLE GRAFTON, now admits making up rape claim because “she liked the attention”
    AMANDA ROLAND, had made a detailed rape accusation to police, but latter admitted that she had “made up the story and staged a scene” at her home to make it appear as if a struggle had taken place.
    MELINDA DENHAM, now admits to “falsely accusing her boyfriend of rape” because she was angry at him for not returning her phone calls.
    “IDENTITY PROTECTED” Female Student, now admits that she “lied about fighting off Rapist”.
    “IDENTITY PROTECTED” female, who claimed she was sexually assaulted by two male students, now admits “it didn’t happen”.
    BIURNY PEGUERO made a rape claim that saw a man sentenced to 20 years in prison, but finally confesses four years later, to a priest and then to the DA’s office that she “made the whole thing up” because she wanted people to feel sorry for her.
    GEMMA SCOONES, now admits to making, what turned out to be her “second false rape allegation” but still avoids prison;
    ELIZABETH JONES, finally admitted she “lied about her latest rape allegation” because she did not like the man she accused of attacking her.
    EMILY CHATTERS, plagued” police with dozens of calls to make complaints of rape. Only after police showed her “irrefutable evidence” that her version could not be true, did she finally admit…. “Yes all the allegations were false”.
    DANMELL NDONYE, had five men arrested after accusing them of gang rape. Only after prosecutors confronted her with a cellphone video that captured “the whole sordid episode” and showed she had willingly participated, did she finally admit she had in fact “lied about the incident”.
    LEANNE BLACK, had made multiple allegations of rape to police against a series of ex-boyfriends, over an eight year period, but finally made a full admission in open court that the “rapes never happened”.
    “IDENTITY PROTECTED” Female, who claimed she had been sexually assaulted a man, later admitted that she “made a false report” to the police.
    EMMA SAXON, claimed to have been raped in a supermarket car park, but now openly admits “the matter never happened”.
    MICHELLE ROSSITER, made a series of allegations of rape against one man, but eventually admitted to the police that the rape allegations she had made to them previously “were not genuine”.
    JUNE PLUNKETT, accused a man of rape, but finally “pleads guilty” to making a false rape claim which included her “slashing herself” with a blade or razor before making the allegations to police.
    AMANDA MOYSE, eventually admitted in open court, to perverting the course of justice by making a “false allegation of rape” against an innocent man.
    CHARLENE KIELTY claimed to police that she was raped by a bus driver in the back of his coach, but finally admitted in open court, to “making the false allegation”.
    “IDENTITY PROTECTED” Woman, admits that she made a false allegation of sexual assault.
    MEGAN FRANKS, claimed to have been raped by a man who was subsequently arrested, but eventually admitted to police that she had made up the rape allegations and even to injuring herself to be more credible.
    CATHY RICHARDSON, told police officers that she had been sexually assaulted several times but now admits her “allegations were false”.
    JACQUELINE McCOMMOND, made an allegation that she was raped, but finally admitted to police that she “made the whole thing up”.
    BEVERLY BRANDRETH had “cried rape” against an ex-boyfriend but finally pleaded guilty to lying in court.
    MISS SO LEONG-YING, told police in graphic detail how she was gang-raped by four men. But after police confronted her with evidence of the bogus rape and robbery, admitted to “making up the story” in the hope of attracting publicity to her name.
    CHARLENE STEEL made an accusation of sexual assault against a man, but later pleaded guilty to “falsely claiming to have been raped”.
    KELLY HARWOOD, claimed that her friend’s son had raped her, later confessed that she “had made it up”.
    NATALIE MORTIMER, had accused her grandfather of raping her, but later admitted she had “made it up” in a bid to claim inheritance money.
    JOANNA ROBERTSON now admits to “making up a sex attack allegation” — leading to an innocent man being held in custody.
    EMMA BLUNDEN, told police that she had been raped by four men, but was eventually found to have been lying.
    KATHERINE CLIFTON statements led too rape charges against a professor who subsequently spent nine days in jail as well as being placed on leave from his job, eventually pleaded guilty in court to “making false statements” to the police.
    TEMITOPE ADENUGBA, made a rape allegation to police against a man they later arrested, but subsequently admitted in open court to making “false statements” and perverting the course of justice.
    It’s worth noting that in most of the cases above, the woman only admitted to lying because she was shown irrefutably evidence ( video, CCTV, eye-witnesses, phone tracking, DNA…. ).
    I truly shudder to think just how many men are sitting in prison today just because they were unlucky enough to cross paths with one such Vindictive-Fembitch-Psycho-Cunt?
    Of course there will always be False-Rape-Denialists who will try to argue that these women were bullied into recanting and that we should ignore their confessions. But isn’t it funny how they never use this argument when an accused man confesses, even though he is likely to have come under a great deal more pressure from police.
    I promos you this…. No man will be found guilty of “date-rape” while I’m on the jury!
    As Enlightened Red Pill Men and women it is our duty to educate and inform other less fortunate brothers and sisters, as to the truly evil nature of this feminist contrived gender war. So feel free to cut and paste this list and post it where ever you find a “False Rape Denialist” spouting pretty lies.
    So why do some women lie about rape?

  33. “consent is consent, blind drunk or otherwise, and regret after the event cannot make it rape.” This is so true an Australian Detective commenting on a drunken “rape” case pointed out how common it is for women to go to the police after a drunken encounter claiming rape to cover up for their indiscretions.

  34. “Women Centre [sic] “national lead” Clare Jones hit a similar note…”
    That’s not a misspelling, that’s how every country other than America spells the word.

Comments are closed.