Friday, December 29, 2006

It’s rape if the woman is drunk.

A new proposal, contained in a Home Office report, is being considered by ministers in a bid to boost conviction rates for sex offences and bring more “date rapists” to justice.

The new law would mean a woman judged to be drunk at the time of having sex would be deemed incapable of giving her consent. That would potentially open the way for the prosecution of thousands of men for having sex with drunk women — regardless of whether agreement had been given at the time.

This is a very bad law, for two reasons.
(1) It is a blatant double standard. Being drunk relieves a woman of responsibility for her actions, but it does not relieve a man of responsibility for his. The fact is, in most cases the couple will have been drinking together, and the man will be as drunk as the woman. Why is he responsible if sex takes place, but she isn’t?

(2) It means that a drunk woman is legally incapable of giving consent, so she is, legally, an imbecile. Do women really want to be legally classed alongside children and the insane, every time they have a drink? I wouldn't have thought so. It is deeply patronising towards women.

If a drunk woman is not capable of making adult decisions, then this has wider implications. Surely she should not be allowed out without a responsible guardian, and she should not be allowed access to her own bank account until she sobers up. Surely she cannot be held criminally responsible for anything she does. If she gets into a car while drunk, and kills someone, then she cannot be held responsible. If she murders or steals, or commits any other crime, then the same logic applies. A drunk woman has no responsibility.

What is going through the minds of the civil servants who come up with these ideas? The article tells us:

At present only one rape accusation in 20 ends in a conviction and ministers are convinced that means rapists are getting away with it.

The stated intention of this law is to increase the conviction rate for rape. This is the real reason that this law is a travesty. It has nothing at all to do with promoting justice, or protecting women. It is designed to contrive an excuse to lock men up.

Feminist lobbyists have been agitating the government for a long time to take steps to increase the rape conviction rate at all costs.

Yet no mention is ever made of false accusations. Shannon Taylor, the serial false accuser responsible for sending Warren Blackwell to prison, is still walking the streets. She has accused a string of men of assaulting her, and all of her accusations were lies. Mr Blackwell was the only one to be convicted as far as I know. It doesn’t take many Shannon Taylors to produce a low conviction rate.

Feminists believe that the low conviction rate means that the current law is not working. Yet evidence shows that over 50% of rape accusations are false. I believe that the current law is actually working pretty well most of the time. This new law is a false accusers’ charter.

The actual incidence of rape has been falling steadily since the 1970s, but it does not suit certain interest groups to tell us that. Instead, we are bombarded with constant scare stories about date rape, acquaintance rape, date-rape drugs, rape in marriage, and a host of other lies and distortions.

This constant scare-mongering about rape is part of an on-going, feminist-led cultural war against men, marriage, the family and heterosexuality. The intention is to stir up fear and hatred of men in the minds of women, to destroy heterosexual relations, and, ultimately, bring an end to marriage and the family.

Click here to email your MP. We must oppose this now.

Wednesday, December 27, 2006

Well Done You

Following on from my recent article, The Wonders of Technology, I want to draw your attention to Associated Content, which bills iteself as 'The People's Media Company'. It is a free self-publishing site, on which you can publish your work in text, audio, video or still graphic (e.g. photo) formats.

I noticed it because George Rolph's excellent series of articles 'The War Against Men' is published there. Well worth reading if you haven't already.

This is exactly the kind of site we should be exploiting to the full for several reasons.
(1) We are not all web designers who can produce our own sites, and here we have ready-made 'user-friendly' internet publishing facilities requiring no real expertise.
(2) They have a ready-made body of readers who will come across your material.
(3) Sites like this and YouTube are part of the internet 'mainstream', rather than being dedicated men's activist sites. We are always complaining about how we cannot penetrate the mainstream; this is it. Go forth and penetrate.
(4) 'User generated content' is the 'latest thing' in the media, the new buzzword. 'You' (i.e. all of us) are Time magazine's Person of the Year, in an effort to draw attention to this.
(5) Content from these sites is often picked up by the conventional media.

In short, I think that user generated content sites such as these are our lever into the mainstream media. We should be ferocious in our efforts to colonise this new medium, starting right now. The internet is our Virago.