Several days ago we came across an article that caught our attentions. It involved a Dean from Fordham University who was under investigation because he had dared to present both sides of the perpetual “rape culture on campus” debate.
That’s right. His sin was that he was presenting both sides of an argument. That’s it. That’s all.
Lauren Southern tells it like it is...
The term “rape culture” itself is a gross misnomer because that directly implies that we, in First World nations, are so okay and cool with rape that we let shit like that slide. It’s so prevalent that we do little or nothing about it as it stands as a staple of sorts. The term has become a living parody of itself in the process.
When was the last time you or anyone you knew got up, got showered, got dressed, ate their morning meal and then kissed their spouse on the forehead before leaving with, “I’m off to go rape the shit outta someone. I shouldn’t be more than a couple hours, depending on how fast they run. Good cardio though! See you for dinner!”
?
Anyone?
And yet the far left and Wave Three feminists want us all drinking the same Kool-Aid that sees this happening every day. This is their rape culture narrative.
See it. Want it. Rape it. Rinse and repeat. THAT is how a rape culture works.
In short order.
We do not live in a rape culture and never did. This ain’t the fucking Middle East where this kinda shit goes on unchecked and unchallenged. Places where one could easily argue rape is part of their culture, and no, they really don’t do anything about it. It’s a staple to them. In some cases, they even have LAWS to sanction said rape. That’s right. LAWS to allow for a man to rape a woman. Legally sanctioned sexual assault. In some cases, you have to marry your fucking rapist! BY LAW!
Don’t get us started about how even the “good book” consents to rape as a norm. If your “God” is okay with it, it can’t be all bad, right?
Buddy Christ got yo back, homie!
So here’s a quick question for all of you – how many laws do we, in the First World nations have that legally sanction rape and sexual assault?
SPOILER ALERT: We have exactly zero laws condoning rape in the First World nations.
Now ask yourself just how many laws we have forbidding said acts, and you begin to lose count shortly.
But these jackoffs want the world believing that we have and adopt a rape culture in the First World nations? Pitiful.
What caused all this hubbub was the Dean who presented a counter argument (see: sound debunking) of the oft bandied about stat of “1 in 5 women on campus will be a victim of rape.” That old trope has snaked its way into our collective consciousness for so long that the lie, told often enough, becomes the “new truth”. That’s exactly what it is, though...a lie. An oft debunked and generously discredited statistic that even those who were responsible for the informal, 100% NON SCIENTIFIC STUDY denounced its widespread use as the gospel for all things rapey.
You read that right. Even those that coordinated the informal study are pleading with society to quit using that informal study as the panacea for all things rapey. Even they know that this thing has taken absurdity to whole new levels and presented a world with a boogeyman that never existed.
Christopher Krebs and Christine Lindquist stated:
"Although we used the best methodology available to us at the time, there are caveats that make it inappropriate to use the 1-in-5 number in the way it’s being used today, as a baseline or the only statistic when discussing our country’s problem with rape and sexual assault on campus."
Now wait a tic – we’re not saying that rape on campus doesn’t happen. We’re not saying or even suggesting that rape on campus is just a myth. We’re saying that 1 in 5 being victims of rape is a total and complete fucking fabrication. We’re saying that a purported 20% rate is an absurd number that has absolutely no basis in fact or reality. And we’re not the only ones saying it.
That’s what caused the shitstorm.
A presentation by the Dean that presented the status quo lie of the 1 in 5 stat (see: the lie we all know), and the opposing position (see: the truth we NEED to know) discrediting it. All Hell broke loose from there and thus an investigation was born. Now this poor guy has to defend his actions, as though they ever needed defending.
Despite the fact that he never once claimed that one was right and one was wrong, he merely presented both sides of the perpetual argument and allowed his audience to use their critical thinking skills to determine which was which. He never advocated for either side. He simply presented BOTH sides, and yes, make no mistake, every discussion has two sides to it.
For his “sin” he now faces investigation and what’s sure to be a black mark on his scholastic record for daring to show the world that there are always two sides to a story, and to afford people the ability to determine which is which.
You can’t make this shit up.
Further evidence that we live in a world that is not interested in facts or the truth. We live in a society that wants to treat lies like the “new truth” because it fits their social narrative so well and furthers their agenda(s). They want it so bad that they’ll go out of their way to stifle any attempt to present the other side.
Proof?
Take the PragerU video itself that was used in his presentation. PragerU has been stifled to the point where they were left no alternative but to “go public” with their assertion that Google/YouTube had effectively censored their channel.
Why?
Because their channel presents the other side.
Kinda like our wee blog here likes to do. To rally behind the unpopular opinion because it needs to be shared and viewed and spread. To ensure that we buck the trend of supporting the “new truth” in any way we can, and to avoid latching on to the same false narrative being parroted by so many because gee, it’s the popular opinion to carry.
They even listed off some notable examples of material that YouTube had effectively censored:
- Why Don’t Feminists Fight for Muslim Women?
- Who’s More Pro-Choice: Europe or America?
- What ISIS Wants
- Are 1 in 5 Women Raped at College?
- Is America Racist?
- Israel: The World’s Most Moral Army
- Radical Islam: The Most Dangerous Ideology
- The Most Important Question About Abortion
- Why Do People Become Islamic Extremists?
- Pakistan: Can Sharia and Freedom Coexist?
Notice any trends there?
Each discusses the un-discussable. The other side. The unpopular opinion. The taboo things that people aren’t interested in hearing because it may otherwise obliterate their own lies they’ve been living and shatter their fantasy world.
After seeing that, it makes us that much more steadfast here and reminds us that we are on the right track. We must continue to fight against the waves of “new truth” to present the other side.
What are people so afraid of?
Why does society continue to reject those things that provide them facts and evidence instead of conjecture and anecdotal findings?
Why so they continue to rebuff in the face of actual facts?
Why are they so afraid to lose their lie?
We think that people have become so obsessed with the “new truths” they have been fed that they would rather live a comfortable lie than an uncomfortable truth. That is not a good way to live a life. Behind a lie, or a wall of them. In order to grow and mature, one needs truth like we need oxygen. It allows us to understand better the world around us, including the many flaws it contains. To deny one’s self the truth is akin to denying one’s self the very air we breathe and need to survive.
Society needs to be called to the carpet for such things as this investigation for a “sin” of sharing both sides in an objective manner. This can’t go by unchecked and unchallenged. More and more people have to stand firm and reject false narratives in the face of facts, and they have to allow for both sides to be played out to allow themselves the ability to make an informed choice instead of simply jumping a bandwagon.
If society wants to rally for something, rally for this. Rally for the truth. Rally for another dimension to an existing story. Convince more people to pull their heads from the sand to see what ELSE is happening and being said.
Atta boy, Walter.
For in the end, the harder you try to stifle the truth (censorship/disinviting guests/riots/etc.), the more you make it known to one and all that the position you’re trying to defend is not the right one. If you’re that afraid to have people see or hear the other side, then how credible is YOUR side after all?
Think about that...
Free your 8 SCAs always, if you have any questions, concerns, comments or suggestions, feel free to leave them below or contact us.
