Tuesday, July 19, 2011

Rape on the Steps of Parliament

Cultural Enrichment News

As we have reported previously, all the stranger rapes in Oslo over the past five years — when the perpetrators could be identified — were committed by Muslim immigrants, and almost all of the victims were indigenous Norwegians. This is an example of “conquest through rape”, which is has been a feature of the Islamic hijra all over the world ever since the 7th century.

This latest rape would seem to be just another in a long series — a 20-year-old Norwegian girl raped by a 15-year-old North African asylum-seeker in downtown Oslo. Ho-hum, dog bites man, right?

Well, not entirely. This particular atrocity occurred on the steps of the Norwegian parliament, facing the Castle. To make matters even worse, as the young culture-enricher worked his will on the victim, he was being observed live via a video surveillance camera by security guards inside the parliament building — who did not leave the building to help the young woman.

It seems that interrupting a rape on the front steps was not part of their job description — that task rightly belonged to the police, who unfortunately arrived too late to interrupt the crime.

Oh, and one more thing: the suspect was apprehended, but released from custody later in the day.

Many thanks to Reinhard of ICLA for translating the article from Document.no:

Security guards zoomed in rape — did not go outside until assault was completed

The Stortinget security guards followed the rape of the almost unconscious 20-year old directly on video without intervening.

The security guards changed the surveillance camera from panorama shots to zoom in on the rape being perpetrated on the steps of Stortinget, but did not go to the scene before the perpetrator was finished and about to leave the area.

“I can confirm that our people have contributed video to the police in conjunction with this event. My section is always at work, but we are primarily there to ensure the safety of the national Norwegian parliament,” says the Stortinget security chief Gerrit Løberg to Dagbladet.

“We assisted in a way that ensured the perpetrator was apprehended,” he continues.

“Would you have intervened if you have discovered this?”

“No, when a crime is taking place, the police are contacted. As I understand it, they arrived promptly.”

When Dagbladet asks for a meeting about the security officers’ behaviour, Gerrit Løberg replies:

“No. We have a lot to do today. But I understand that you want to make a big thing out of this, and it’s a dry news season.”

The images from the surveillance camera also show that several people pass by without intervening. Someone stops and smiles, and at least one person is alleged to have taped the brutal assault on the almost unconscious woman.

The 15-year-old North African asylum-seeker who is suspected of the rape has been released from custody. Neither the victim or the witnesses have contacted the police.

The article from Dagbladet (in Norwegian).


For a complete listing of previous enrichment news, see The Cultural Enrichment Archives.

Hat tip: Fjordman.

37 comments:

Cyrus said...

This is just sad :( I can only guess that this loser will not be evicted, let alone sentenced for his crime.

sameer said...

Are there no men left in Norway who can protect their women.

The EU law on human rights is in urgent need of amendment. Anyone asylum seeker or immigrant breaking law should be immediately deported ... no matter what the circumstances in their home countries.

Since the rapist was underage he will most probably just get away with a slap on the wrist.

This case should be made as an example to prove the violent and depraved disposition of the Muslims.

Thoughts and prayers for the victim and her family.

I assume that we will not hear about this case anymore because of the age of the rapist. The victim will be harassed in the court trial by another sleazy Muslim lawyer representing the rapist claiming that the woman was drunk, inappropriately dressed which led to the "pious Muslim" loose his control and that’s why "she deserved it".

No matter what they say ... SHAME ON THOSE SECURITY GUARDS.

The Muslims will treat this rapist as their hero and consider this as Islam's victory by rape of the sovereignty of Norway on the footsteps of their Parliament.

Another very sad day for Europe.

Homophobic Horse said...

Something about this story doesn't add up.

Gregory said...

Norwegians, Dutch, Swedes.....90% of them are cowards. Too much soft living. Low morality taught in schools and by parents. Low passions are the only virtues being aggrandized all over europe. G_D kicked out of everywhere over there. Left a vacuum. Which has been filled by muslims and their demon allah.

Robert Marchenoir said...

Thank God I'm not a specialist on rape, but the part about passers-by smiling and not getting involved to stop the assault does not necessarily spell cowardice.

I'm not sure that in all instances of outdoor rape the victim puts up a big flashing sign saying : hey, this is not consensual, I'm actually being raped.

And we don't live in such an orderly world nowadays that sex in a public place cannot be consensual.

I remember a TV news report about such as assault in America. A woman was raped on the pavement in full view of passing cars. At least two drivers phoned the police. One of them was a woman. It was clear from her call that she was not sure that a rape was taking place.

One journalist asked the local police chief what was the proper attitude in such a case, the implication being : hey, shouldn't have someone got physically involved with the criminal and stopped the assault ?

The chief said : that lady did the right thing. Call 911. He then went on to vaguely suggest that if you were young, and male, and fit, and willing to have a go at it, you might try to stop the crime yourself, but he certainly did not encourage citizens to "do something" in such a situation, except to call the police.

For what it's worth.

1389 said...

The Second Amendment...not just for Americans any more.

EVERY free country needs it.

Just sayin'.

EscapeVelocity said...

The young girls of Norway are enjoying the fruits of the New Left movement (which includes the Feminists and the assault on sexual mores, the family, and traditional gender roles.) The dissolution of the Western Family and Social Unity.

Wont Get Fooled Again!

Ralph Lynn said...

The death of a people from a thousand small atrocities. Shameful.

pjt said...

Homophobic Horse said...
>Something about this story doesn't add up.

What Gates of Vienna does not translate is that the woman was very intoxicated, nearly unconscious:

- Kvinnen var svært beruset, nærmest bevisstløs og helt ute av stand til å ta vare på seg selv.

That, of course, does not justify an assault, but it makes it difficult for others to see what goes on.

So, passers-by just smiled, because they thought the act was consensual. It is inconvenient and potentially dangerous to meddle in affairs of others. A typical response to be expected is that the *woman* attacks you if you intervene.

Ali said...

//Norwegians. This is an example of “conquest through rape”, which is has been a feature of the Islamic hijra all over the world ever since the 7th century.//

Uhh what? LOL the one thing i've noticed on this blog is people lie to win followers. Haha who do you think you're fooling?

gsw said...

sameer said...
"Are there no men left in Norway who can protect their women."

Wrong attitude! Women do not want to return to the protectorate. Plus, as you see from the post, not everyone was sure whether it was consensual.

No, Europe needs to reinstate the laws giving women the right to protect themselves. When I was (lots) younger, I carried a knife.
Now if a women carries a knife, or worse - actually uses it to protect herself from a rapist - chances are pretty much 50/50 which of them is arrested, the rapist or the victim.

Girls living in the 'culturally-enriched' areas of Europe are no longer even permitted to carry pepper-spray. (And far too many of them are law abiding and have no way to protect themselves at all!)

Tryst said...

As a security guard myself, I find this to be shameful in the extreme. You first directive as a security guard is the safety of people and that goes before the security of any property. Those guards should be sacked for doing nothing about it.

As for personal security, I feel that, since we are getting Asians and blacks from countries that allow people to carry tasers, they should allow them to be carried and used here in Europe as well. Give our girls the means to protect themselves or are they just considered meat for the pleasure of any immigrant who wants them?

EscapeVelocity said...

Wrong attitude! Women do not want to return to the protectorate. --- gsw

That is why European men are standing around watching when they are raped by foreign multicultural colonists.

As I said. Enjoy!

The women and the minorities are in charge...the 60s radicals a huge success.

Wont be long till it all comes crashing down. Be careful what you wish for.

Fortress said...

Disgusting as this is, the women have not but themselves to blame for this one. Yes, I said that, the woman is at fault here. Not for the rape, that was soley the province of the cultural enricher who was taking advantage of weakness and rot of this society, like a maggot feeding on dead flesh. No, the women of the west in general, and Norway in particular in this insance, are responsible for their men not coming to their rescue when things like that happens.

The women and their enablers have destroyed their men, starting from time they're babies, by making it something wrong to be a man and feel what they do. we've all read it and seen it. Forcing them to play with dolls, sit down on the toilet, dope them up with drugs when they don't comply or are simply being boys, don't even acknowledge they're boys at all. Then when they get older, these confused, desperate, longing boys are told their desire is evil, but they can't shut it off. Punished for looking, and are then called less than men for not looking. They marry, but having been turned into sheep, the women use them as walking ATMs, divorcing them, and then enslaving them for lifetime alimony and child support; often for children that aren't theirs. They tried to be good fathers, but the women constantly, almost invariably, turn towards men like the one who commited the rape in question. Told that if they just shut up, pay their taxes, and be good little drones, they will be rewarded with something their biology demands they acquire (but is told is wrong...that will always be something that screas them over).

They are hurting. Hurting turns to anger. Anger to hatred. And the more discerning among them take the red pill and see what was done to them for the terrible evil thing it was. The anger grows. The hatred goes from all consuming and hot to cold and internalized, killing any and all feelings of empathy a man might have for any woman not of their family (and in a growing number of cases, even the women of their family are not immune...nor should they be). They watch a woman beaten, raped, and murdered on the street, and don't even bat an eye; just walking around it as the impediment to his travels that it was.

Though it could have gone far worse for me, and has for others, I know this well enough on a personal level. Why should I stick my neck out for someone who would chop it off at first opportunity? Why should I fight for a civilization that I have no stake in and worse, wishes only my destruction? Why should I fight for women who do these things to their own fathers, sons, and husbands? Who reward the criminals, the rapists, the thugs...the creatures who are not more than the worst of monster while absolutely annilating those who produce and protect?

No, the women of the west have made dug their grave. I don't even care enough kick the dirt back into the hole. Expect a whole lot more of this.

latté island said...

Since some people here are blaming the victim, i.e. all women, even very young ones like the one here, are responsible for the excesses of some feminists, can we also blame all men for the excesses of capitalists who imported the cheap labor, or socialists who imported the non-white leftist voters?

I don't blame all men for this or any other rape, I'm just pointing out the faulty logic in saying, all women this or that, because the mass importing of immigrants was started by some men (not all men).

Also, regarding the ethnicity of the security guards, does anyone know? Where I live, most security guards are black and some have criminal records, because it's considered a low status, low skill job, even though it shouldn't be. So even though the guards may have been Euro, I wouldn't assume that, and it may be interesting to find out.

Fortress said...

Since some people here are blaming the victim, i.e. all women, even very young ones like the one here, are responsible for the excesses of some feminists,

That didn't take long. This argument is what is known as NAWALT, or in other terms Not All Women Are Like That. This is true, but it lacks a certain degree of nuance. Sort of like being handed a six shot revolver and being told that one of chambers is unloaded. Would you dare to put the gun up to your head and pull the trigger? After all, not all chambers are loaded, right? That's what women have become to men; a loaded gun pointed at our heads by people who really want to pull that trigger. Dare we hope for an unloaded chamber or a misfire? Yeah, right.

I invite you to do a google search for NAWALT and read the articles that pop up. Some are more...forgiving...than others, but overall, the argument holds no water with me. Not when I watch my brothers and fellow men, all divorced, all paying ungodly sums of alimony and/or child support, all of their wives riding the alpha *)(& carousel, which in this case means whatever psycho or thug makes them tingle.

can we also blame all men for the excesses of capitalists who imported the cheap labor, or socialists who imported the non-white leftist voters?

Capitalists? No, those aren't capitalists. Capitalists don't destroy their consumer base and then expect the bribes and connections they've made to get the people they want into power to enslave and/or destroy that former consumer base to continue to provide them their wealth and position. No, these are not capitalists. Some call what you described corporatists. Me, I just call it old fashioned tyranny. The serf/slave system reborn with a few alpha men (and their harems of willing women) on top with the rest on the bottom, not even owning their lives anymore.

The socialists do the same thing by other means, in that you're somewhat correct, but I'll assume you abridged the full scope for brevity. There's no way a single forum post could begin to describe the full multipronged attack...and besides, we'd just be quoting the Communist Manifesto.

I don't blame all men for this or any other rape, I'm just pointing out the faulty logic in saying, all women this or that, because the mass importing of immigrants was started by some men (not all men).

Supported a great deal by women and feminism who reward their alpha men with sex and power (votes) by bringing in these men that make them tingle after emasculating and destroying their own men. Have sex with a thug and stick hubby with the bill, all the while blaming those men for not being sexy enough. Win, win, win, and the male (usually white and beta) is always at fault. Irresponsible behavior, guilt free, and subsidized by the government.

Again, the full scope of what I described was abridged for brevity's sake, but much of what I've described has been documented elsewhere, if you care to look. Or you can just open your eyes and count the number of divorced and destroyed fathers and sons around you right this second as opposed to what was around even twenty years ago.

latté island said...

These misogynist rants that erupt here occasionally are so OT. If they were about Jews, everyone would see the problem right away, but apparently, women are still fair game as Jews aren't. I hope GoV doesn't go the way of a few other sites I've almost stopped reading (VFR, Mangan's) because of some people losing the plot. To remind Fortress and others, you know who you are, or maybe not: a girl was raped in public by a cultural enricher, and no one helped her. This isn't about anyone's bad divorce or lack of dates.

RebelliousVanilla1 said...

I would like to know why would Norwegian men care about Norwegian women. Considering the actions of the Norwegian women and that they deny that they belong to Norwegian men, there's no reason for the men to defend them. Wasn't providing and protecting in exchange for chastity and submission? Without patriarchy, only idiots would white knight.

If I was a Norwegian man, I'd probably not care either. I actually asked this before - why should European men fight for the rights of European women instead of convert to Islam and get the European women nonetheless on better terms? Besides silly outrage, I didn't get anything.

latté island said...

RV, Norwegian women belong to themselves, as individual human beings. One doesn't earn protection in return for submission, except perhaps dhimmis, who are protected by Muslim conquerors.

Ideally, and often in real life, free individuals protect each other, regardless of sex, or even race. I hope I'd acquit myself honorably in such a scenario, to the best of my ability--even if the victim belonged to a class I had reason to dislike.

If one could rationalize one's inaction because of what people similar to the victim did, it's all over. Once most people think this way, an equally good question would be, why should anyone help anyone.

RebelliousVanilla1 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
RebelliousVanilla1 said...

latte, then why should Norwegian men risk their own lives if they also belong to themselves(duty doesn't go only one way and I'm sure they can do without the protection of Norwegian women)? It is irrational to face a risk for others, if we are all independent individuals.

And there are reasons to help others - I do help my friends and family. For others, it is a social convention to do it - convention that had underlying premises that are no longer valid.

latté island said...

Of course it's not necessary to risk one's life...just shouting or throwing something can make a difference. And people being independent individuals doesn't require nihilism and indifference. I doubt that any rescuer consults their little book of "what have you done for me lately," before acting.

Of course it's irrational to do things for others without an immediate reward, it's based on goodwill. Only in places like Somalia, would most people think otherwise. I assume Norway is still pleasant enough for this news item to be unusual.

Where I live, we had an even worse incident, where a man committed suicide by drowning himself in the SF Bay, while our police and fire department watched, because of bureaucratic confusion. It made national news, and it shook up our whole town and led to the situation being fixed. Why should anyone care about some crazy guy committing suicide? Well, because we don't live in Somalia yet. A young woman finally swam out and rescued the guy, but it was too late. It wasn't a woman's duty to rescue a man, she did it for her own reasons (good karma?)

RebelliousVanilla1 said...

Ok, this will take longer than I thought. Here is how things ARE. We have two types of societies.
1)Organic society: Women do belong, at least in a moral sense to the men, who have an implicit duty to defend each other's property and hence including each other's women. When women didn't do their part as assigned to them or if men were cowards, there were effective ostracism measures to be taken. Nordic societies have always been more egalitarian because Nordic women could effectively take part in these fights.
2)Individual society: We have equal individuals whose responsibility comes towards those who contracted them to do a specific task.
The 2nd type of society actively selects against people with the behavior of the first type of society because of free ridership - they help, think they have a duty to anything, even if nobody else does. Sure, the behaviors will still be around in an implicit form for a while, but they will go away. The people who still do these things are the remnants and creations of the organic society and because that society doesn't exist anymore, these people won't, in the future either.

Now, getting into the normative side of things. By postulating that we are individuals and we each belong to ourselves, you are saying that we are solely responsible for our own defense, unless we hired others to protect us(police, bodyguards etc) and since the paradigm of a society of individuals is self-interest, I ask you within the paradigm of the society you support - why should anyone have a duty to others(especially the strong towards the weak in the case in which the only duty is to defend others, which the strong don't get out of the weak)? You can't have your cake and eat it too and pretend like we have implicit duties that were based on organic societies that no longer exist. Not living in Somalia isn't a particularly strong argument.

The whole nihilism thing is so Auster, by the way. Aren't the nihilists those that destroyed the organic societies? Or it goes only one way in this case too? :)

latté island said...

RV, if all women carried guns, even this incident wouldn't have happened, because a predator couldn't be sure any individual woman or onlooker wasn't armed. Even if, as someone else mentioned, she may have been drunk, the possibility that she or someone else had a gun, would cut down on this type of incident. Ending immigration from the third world and deporting those types, would also prevent this type of crime.

It's not necessary at all to think about who has duties to whom. It's a matter of improving everyone's odds by doing certain things. Once you have a system that depends on submission of one group to another, in order to protect them against people who shouldn't be there in the first place, the system itself is broken and should be fixed. Women don't need the Mafia, or dhimmification, or any other system. They just need the ordinary laws applied, like the right of self defense and getting violent people off the streets.

Even in the past, when there was more chivalry, women did get raped, and their submission didn't help all that much. This fact is part of feminism...I mean real feminism, which used to include self-defense.

I'm afraid all these rationalizations for violence against women are coming from the same place, whether from angry Western men, or angry Muslim men. Misogyny is misogyny, whether it's manifested as a Muslim man raping a Norwegian woman, or their Western apologists who get off vicariously. This is personal pathology, not a sustainable political program.

Robert Marchenoir said...

"Misogyny" is like "racism".

Misogyny means (broadly speaking) not liking women. If women behave in such a way that they don't deserve to be liked, why should men like them ?

That's not different from Blacks needing to be avoided, because a disproportionate number of them have criminal habits.

Being liked is not a human right. Feminists tend to forget that.

Also, no one can seriously expect most people, even less most women, and not even a significant proportion of women, to carry a gun.

Carrying a gun is not a normal thing in a civilised society, even less so for a woman.

Being feminine is not compatible with carrying a gun. Remember what being feminine means ? Or is it too old hat ?

Things being what they are, conceal carry laws are a good thing in the United States.

However, a society which is functional only if people carry is a disfunctional society.

EscapeVelocity said...

One thing is certain, we are going to experience the fallout of the degradation and disintegration of the family unit, marriage, social bonds of our peoples.

And it isnt going to be pleasant.

This little rape scene is just emblematic of the chaos that is headed our way in ever increasing abundance.

PS - How about the Not All Muslims are Like That defense?

Yeah, that is what I thought.

EscapeVelocity said...

RV, when the white knights give up, then its truly over.

That is why the Christians will be the saviors of Western Civilization, once again.

Green Infidel said...

Agreed - if the woman acts like "easy meat" anyway, then why risk yourself for her? But can we assume that? Have all Norwegian women taken this route and gone off the deep end?

Maybe she was one of the innocent ones - maybe even a counterjihadi... so should no-one have stepped up to the plate to save her? And if they hadn't succeeded, and she would have turned-out to be one of the "enlightened" women - then she would have been in the wrong - and her white knight all the more wronged, and all the more on the right side - as a brave, upstanding citizen - and an example to others... alas, these "security guards" were clearly not in that category...

Mary Jackson said...

if the woman acts like "easy meat" anyway,

Sound familiar, anyone?

Hardly worth being saved from Islam, is it?

Green Infidel said...

My point exactly... a lot of women are not only, in the Sheikh's definition, "uncovered meat" - but don't mind acting every bit the part, and wearing clothes that wouldn't look out of place in the "cavegirl" era... And then they are mightily surprised to encounter "cavemen"?

Homophobic Horse said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Mary Jackson said...

Given that, in the Green Infidel world (more Green than Infidel, I'd say), men are absolved from any responsibility for rape - the latter being always the woman's fault for not being "modest" enough - it is difficult to see what advantage the Green Infidel world has over the Muslim world.

In fact, one of the achievements of Western civilisation is that men can control their violent urges, and that rape is never justified.

Rape happens to women in burkhas as much as women in bikinis. It is despicable act of violence and is never ever justified.

Fortress said...

These misogynist rants that erupt here occasionally are so OT. If they were about Jews, everyone would see the problem right away, but apparently, women are still fair game as Jews aren't. I hope GoV doesn't go the way of a few other sites I've almost stopped reading (VFR, Mangan's) because of some people losing the plot.

Let's see. Ah, misogyny. An appeal to emotion. 'so OT'? Appeal to ridicule. Jews and women being hated on I believe was the intent of that statement? Association fallacy. The list goes on, but listing logical fallacies isn't itself an argument. Concerning misogyny, as one post already put it, that's like being called a racist. See, anyone that notes something is wrong, like Muslims are killing people that do not believe as they do en masse is racism and intollerant. Women are primarily responsible for voting in those who allow them their entitlement (mostly Democrats...look it up) without being made to take responsibility. Look up the words, VAWA, No Fault Divorce (and who usually pays for it), the statistics on who really initiates divorces (or forces the other party to), the general fear that all men are paedophile rapists, the fact that in many states when a domestic violence call is issued the man must be arrested and taken from his home, etc, etc. This does not count the supression of the nature of little boys, the demonization of men's desire, which we have all seen and all read the accounts of. Hell, they're making the boys over in that part of the world sit down to urniate, to add another nail into that coffin.

To remind Fortress and others, you know who you are, or maybe not: a girl was raped in public by a cultural enricher, and no one helped her. This isn't about anyone's bad divorce or lack of dates.

And that is a terrible thing. No argument. The question was, why did no one save her, especially the man who could have done something? The answer is, why would anyone save someone who is part and parcel to everything that has destroyed everything they are? NAWALT is true, but too many women have waged their own Jihad against men (mostly white and beta) for far too long. You see it in how they treat their sons, how they treat their fathers, who they vote into office, the severe imbalance in the family court systems that they use to destroy their husband's lives. And those that don't, like Muslims, are often...FAR too often...in tacit support of those that push this agenda. Don't blame me for being angry at injustice, for that is the appropriate response to injustice. Blame instead your fellow women, as I assume you are, for pushing men to this point. Do something about them for a change. You want men to defend you? Women have to make themselves worth defending again.

Fortress said...

RV, Norwegian women belong to themselves, as individual human beings. One doesn't earn protection in return for submission, except perhaps dhimmis, who are protected by Muslim conquerors.

I suspsect this is an outgrowth of the argument that women were used as slaves by their men. This has never EVER been true. It is true that women's sexuality and the products thereof were given to the man in marriage, but in turn, they took something very real. See, a man only needs about 20% of his labor to sustain his existence. When he married, by gaining a wife who would bear him children, he was then yoked into full production...she took the remaining substantial amount of his labor. It put a roof over her head, food on her and the children's plate, and protection when the wolves or enemies came to the door...it was always the man who went out to meet them and often die for the women and children.

Regardless, if you wish to live with other human beings in freedom, certain things of those human beings and in return you yourself must be subject to those same expectations. The gods of the copy book heading demand nothing less than this; anything else is people enslaved to other people. One of the chief expectations is that one does not defend that which will not in turn defend them.

Ideally, and often in real life, free individuals protect each other, regardless of sex, or even race. I hope I'd acquit myself honorably in such a scenario, to the best of my ability--even if the victim belonged to a class I had reason to dislike.

This is suiicide. One protects only what is worth protecting. If I am to sell my life, it will be only for something that's worth it. I will not sell my life to protect my enemies. I will not sell my life to protect those who kill me and my civilization. I would sell my life for my family. I'd have sold my life for my fellow soldiers when I was in, and would do at first opportunity if I had to. I'd sell my life for the ideal of what the United States was supposed to be, not this corrupted sham of a republic it has become. I'd sell my life for my friends, even those few who are women. But for some woman I do not know? She can go hang.

If one could rationalize one's inaction because of what people similar to the victim did, it's all over. Once most people think this way, an equally good question would be, why should anyone help anyone.

We're not talking one or two instances of a problem here. We're talking the VAST majority of western women. Again, rather than attacking me for being the messenger, why don't you deal with the women who have made this our reality? I've found most women won't even do that. It's always our...MY fault for daring to feel anger and hatred when I and my fellow men are subjected to injustice, never the fault of those beautiful creatures who are the ones who are subjecting them to it: the vast majority of western women.

Green Infidel said...

Mary Jackson -

"Given that, in the Green Infidel world (more Green than Infidel, I'd say), men are absolved from any responsibility for rape..."

Now where exactly did I say that? It takes two to tango... If I wave a 100-dollar bill at midnight on a poor street in the Bronx, what do you think is going to happen? Which by no means makes it "legitimate" for whoever then proceeds to make themselves 100 dollars richer... But "two to tango" in the rape scenario also means that some women do enjoy what then happens... ever heard of Stockholm syndrome? Women who even defended their rapists in court, then married them... And who do you think on average gets more women the "legitimate" way? The average immigrant gang rapist? Or the nerdy guy from the office who has "great respect" for women? If women want to be treated well, why do they so often go for the assholes? Perhaps it's one of those questions with no logical answer - but addressing a frequent occurence nonetheless...

And many women nowadays are waving a lot more than 100-dollar bills - to attract attention from men. One might say to frustrate men, as one would naturally want such a woman, but can never have her... so what do you think will eventually happen, when a man with no respect for women comes along?

Nope - it wasn't always like this in the West. Not until the hip-hop era came along on MTV, with badass rappers surrounded by 50 "pieces of meat" in bikinis, and everything else ceased to matter... and suddenly out on the street, women came dressed just like such meat - in tiny see-through dresses, with maybe the only bit of clothing visible through them being their G-string. What does such a style say to the predator who has no respect, apart from "you can take me"?

Blarg said...

>These misogynist rants that erupt here occasionally are so OT. If they were about Jews, everyone would see the problem right away, but apparently, women are still fair game as Jews aren't.

Hah what? Who do you think are these leftists and socialists? Ancient aliens?

Big Bill said...

"One doesn't earn protection in return for submission, except perhaps dhimmis, who are protected by Muslim conquerors."

One DOES earn protection in return for submission ... and fealty. One "earns" this "protection" for this reason in every country in the world, to my knowledge.

In England, if you violated the laws (i.e. you did not "submit"), then you were declared "outlaw" (i.e. outside of the law). As someone outside the law, the law no longer protected you, and you could be killed, willy-nilly, by anyone who chose to.

When you live in an ultra-individualistic or anarchic culture, your protection is solely a result of your strength.