Not only do feminist women disarm themselves, they disarm other women who want to resist! This is the danger of the radical feminists of today. They are anti-everything that empowers women it seems.
In an editorial by feminist Amanda Marcotte at the Daily Beast, “When you legalize guns on campus, rapists will have more guns to rape with,” It seems Ms. Marcotte either believes women won’t carry guns for protection or aren’t capable of carring a gun for self defense. She only succeeds if her purpose was to self-righteously insult people, especially women. The language of her article is explosively dismissive. People who believe in the Second Amendment are “gun fondlers” and it goes downhill from there.
As I read the editorial, I was reminded of Voltaire’s quote: “It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.” Indeed, it is not only difficult to free them; it is difficult to prevent them from chaining others it appears.
Marcotte thinks that rapists don’t use guns because they aren’t legal on campus yet. As soon as they are legal, then rapists will want to use them to give themselves an additional advantage. After all rapists obey the law already right? So why don’t they use guns now? It isn’t like college campuses and dorms are places where it is difficult to smuggle contraband.
Oh yeah you can’t find boys, drugs or under aged drinking in any of the female dorms now. I forgot sorry.
Basically, Marcotte thinks people who are “planning” (her emphasis) on raping are completely compliant with all gun laws. People who are fine with raping women will not violate a “gun free zone” sign.
After all it’s not like rape is illegal either. So the solution Ms. Marcotte is simple. If they obey signs we put you outside naked and a sign that says “no rape zone” and that will protect you.
Let me tell you the reason rapists often don’t use guns IT’S BECAUSE THEY DON’T NEED TO! They typically have a size and stregth or at least a strength advantage on a woman.And that is the whole point of the need for “gun fondling” as Marcotte likes to call it.
The difference between an unarmed man and an unarmed woman gives the man a much greater advantage. The difference between an armed man and an armed woman reduces that advantage or even reverses it if the woman has bothered to practice like Sarah and I do. More importantly, the potential that a man would get killed or at least seriously injured, as well as arrested if he survives, goes way, way up.
I will tell you something else Ms. Marcotti. Rapists are cowards or else they wouldn’t be rapists. They are much less likely to accept the odds if feminists did their job and told women to defend themselves from predators. If women were armed the cowardly rapists would run away or “plan” to rape a softer less armed target.
Furthermore, this would help women whether or not they are armed (unless they are stupid enough to advertise their disarmed status). If it becomes common for women to be armed, then all women become potential dangers to the attackers. Men who were once “planning” to rape will change their plans.
Of course, the real problem Marcotte has is that she isn’t concerned about rape that involves a violent confrontation and leaves evidence of a struggle. She is concerned about rapes that occur between people who know each other and who are at events where they are getting drunk and, therefore, would have the sense to not carry their firearm. How would we stop these rapes that leave no evidence and that the man claims were consensual?
So on top of allowing carry laws we need to teach our girls to make better choices. Better choices in the men in their lives, better choices about how, when, where and why they drink, an better choices about safety.
I concede if you are going to disarm yourself and get shitfaced with a guy or guys who turns out to be rapist(s) it will be difficult to prevent or prove. We don’t throw people in prison for rape on the basis of unsubstantiated testimony, as far as I know anyway. Ms. Marcotte claims such worries are “rape denialism.” That’s how todays feminists put their fingers in their ears and chant “I can’t hear you now go away.”
It’s also how we get stories in the rolling stone about false gangrapes. It’s amazing to me feminists want to sacrifice todays girls and for what? Propoganda, and the ability to bolster their position that all men are rapists. I mean I have heard all men are rapists because they have the tools to be. I’d answer that with then aren’t all women prostitutes because they have the tools to be?
No? Then use a smaller brush when painting all men. They like us are all unique and individual.
When something makes sense for protecting women today. It seems the stupid and the feminists ride in the same boat. Speaking as a former victim of rape give me my gun against a rapist any day of the week. I’ll take those odds over being a disarmed victim any day. Empower girls = reduce rape and legal gun ownership = empowered girls.
One more reason I’m glad I’m not a feminist, I’m a freedom fighter, a warrior for equality and proud of it.