Tuesday, June 22, 2010

Amanda Marcotte Says That
You Want to Rape Her!

That headline got your attention, didn't it??

And you might want to know more about it. Did Amanda Marcotte really say this? Well you can be the judge. Have a look at the following egregious gaffe and then tell me what your verdict is:











"I concede that a tiny, inconsequential fraction of rape accusations are false. But I also won't be alone in a room with a man that goes on and on about false rape accusations. Said obsession indicates ulterior motives." - Amanda Marcotte - 06/08/2010, 13:08:43
So, Amanda Marcotte appears to be saying (in the blasé tonality of a young urban sophisticate) that any man who will not be silent about false rape accusation is a potential rapist!

Yes. That is what Amanda Marcotte appears to be saying.

And not only a "potential" rapist, but a probable one too! Notice her exact wording:

"Said obsession indicates ulterior motives."

Amanda Marcotte does not soften that phrase with modifiers. She does not inform us that said obsession only might indicate ulterior motives, that it only implies or hints at such motives, or that she only feels that it so implies or so hints.

Nor does she employ the Dennis Miller gambit, by saying "that's my opinion, I could be wrong."

No, she lays her position down in blunt, unequivocally factualistic terms. On the plain face of Amanda Marcotte's words, there is naught else to infer but that any man who is "obsessed" with the issue of false rape accusation has "ulterior motives" — not might have, but HAS! Clearly and categorically!

Amanda Marcotte has used a weasel sentence, as I will call it. For she does not directly tell us what she means by "ulterior motives", but embeds this in a context that leaves almost no room for any interpretation but the one I have indicated.

Once again: that any man who will not be silent about false rape accusation is a potential rapist!

Yes. That is what Amanda Marcotte appears to be saying.

Such a man's ostensible motive might be political, but according to Amanda Marcotte his ulterior motive is personal. How very like a feminist, to amalgamate the personal with the political! So in plain English, Amanda Marcotte is saying that such a man is motivated by the personal desire to commit rape. I see no other construction to draw from Amanda Marcotte's words.

Why else would Amanda Marcotte not be alone in a room with such a man? Does Amanda mean to say, that if she were alone in a room with such a man he would try to sell her the Brooklyn bridge, or steal her handbag, or entrap her in a drug trafficking sting? Would that be his ulterior motive?

Or. . . does Amanda mean to say, that if she were alone in a room with such a man, he would try to rape her?

Yes, that is what I think Amanda Marcotte means to say. I really do.

And so, tying this all together once again, Amanda Marcotte says that if you are a man who "goes on and on" about false rape accusation, then she would not be alone in a room with you because she expects that you would have the ulterior motive of raping her.

Let us be extremely clear: Amanda Marcotte is saying that men (such as your present author) who are passionately outspoken on the subject of false rape accusation, are really just rapists at heart.

That is what Amanda Marcotte is saying. Yes, I say it, and if Amanda has anything to say for herself she can jolly well speak up loud and straight.

Amanda is guilty until proven innocent. It is not our task to prove Amanda Marcotte—or any other feminist—innocent of being a feminist!

Personally, I would not be alone in a room with Amanda Marcotte because I think she would harbor the ulterior motive of falsely accusing me, and would gladly see me go to prison—especially after reading this! Yes, I think Amanda Marcotte is exactly that kind of person. I am convinced that she is morally capable of this; I do not put it past her.

And I don't need to prove a bloody thing, so she had better get busy and talk her way out of it!

Yes: Amanda Marcotte is a potential rape liar!

I say she is.

In addition, Amanda Marcotte is a sickening moral idiot, a brazen intellectual coward, a filthy sexist bigot, and to top it off, a plain old-fashioned hypocrite. And she is unafraid to flaunt these qualities loudly and proudly because she thinks she can get away with it. Po' little princess never got a taste of her own shit when she was growing up. Somebody spoiled her. She fancies herself bullet-proof to the critical gaze and moral intelligence of other people only because she is STUFFED FULL OF HERSELF. And full of other ingredients also, I might add.

Furthermore, as a strong, independant feminist woman, Amanda Marcotte is "empowered" to behave this way. You see, Amanda is not alone—she has peer support! The entire feminist tribe of planet Earth, male and female alike, has got her back! Ain't that swell? Amanda Marcotte need not ever answer to anybody except a "jury of her peers"—because non-feminists and all those other "little people" aren't really people at all . . . are they?

But anyhow, don't play chickenshit with me, Amanda Marcotte! If you think I am a "potential" rapist, then step right up and say it to my face. Just say it!

And if you really, really think I would rape you if I were alone with you, then step right up and say that to my face. Just say it!

I have already told you exactly what I think of YOU: I think that you, Amanda Marcotte, would lie about rape and never give it a second thought!

All right, so you got something to say to ME now?? Then be a "man" about it , grrrl! I dare you.

You are perfectly entitled to your "opinion", as I am entitled to mine, and I will not hold it against you. But here's the deal: I want you to be OPEN about this! I want you to scream it in my face and then scream it to the whole wide world! Don't be bashful! Go for it, you little potential rape liar!

Front and center, Amanda! Front and center!

-------------------------------------------------------

Go now, immediately, and read the following at the False Rape Society:

falserapesociety.blogspot.com/2010/06/this-date-in-history-lorena-bobbitt.html#more

33 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Seems this misandrist even writes for the Guardian.

One has to wonder if there is a single man hater left on the planet NOT employed by that organsation.

10:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Essay: "Men Give, Women Take"

http://news.mensactivism.org/node/15342

1:30 AM  
Blogger trent13 said...

wow, that's messed up. Feminists are unbelievable screwed up.

7:51 AM  
Blogger E. Steven Berkimer said...

"I concede that a fraction of rape accusations are knowable to be true. But I also won't be alone in a room with a woman that goes on and on about rape accusations. Said obsession indicates ulterior motives."

Hmmmmm.....changing that just a tiny bit, makes it sound an awful lot like what you hear from die hard feminists, and those in the "rape industry" (not that there is any difference between the two).

All the best.

8:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There is no "potential" about it -- Amanda established her credentials as a false rape enabler and co-accuser during the Duke fiasco. She is a scumbag.

6:04 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I concede that a tiny, inconsequential fraction of rape accusations are false. But I also won't be alone in a room with a man that goes on and on about false rape accusations. Said obsession indicates ulterior motives." - Amanda Marcotte - 06/08/2010, 13:08:43

I believe the lowest objective figure, from India, was 12% of rape claims are false.

I would hardly call that "a tiny, inconsequential fraction of rape accusations" that are false.

That's assuming that the LOWEST figure determined by objective studies is the correct one, but some say it is anywhere between 25-60%, which would ALMOST make "a tiny, inconsequential fraction of rape accusations" TRUE.

12% of false rape claims in a country of 1.18 billion people. That's hundreds of thousands of innocent men destroyed at the least. That number isn't tiny or inconsequential,as the feminists will very soon learn.

6:38 AM  
Anonymous Social Worker said...

My first post here, though I've read your writings in other places.

I would really like to see Amanda Marcotte respond to you on this.
Is there any way you could bring your piece to her attention?

Her words need to be challenged, but not just in a blog where she won't come across it.
Can you post it (or shortened version) wherever she made her comments?

1:54 PM  
Blogger Fidelbogen said...

@SocialWorker:

I would be surprised if it has not come to her attention already. This post has been linked from the False Rape Society, which Amanda's peers read compulsively, and the visitor traffic from there (thanks, FRS crew!:) has been phenomenal.

The words that I post upon this faux-obscure blog of mine tend to travel and circulate widely.

2:59 PM  
Blogger E. Steven Berkimer said...

I believe the lowest objective figure, from India, was 12% of rape claims are false.


Anon,

The Times of India study figure was 18%. Daphne II commissioned by the EU put the number on the low end at 9%. Kanin at 40. McDowell at 60. The DOJ puts the number at about 15%(of course, that is what they categorize as unfounded. That figure will likely be higher, but really, we don't know the exact number, nor will we likely ever know).

What Amanda and others don't want to state, is that it really doesn't matter how high or how low the percentage is. Just like with rape, 1 is too many. And we should all be working together to fix both problems. But she, like most rabid feminists, see it as a zero sum game, where any attention paid to those falsely accused, takes away from women who are raped (men and boys who are raped aren't an issue for them).

It's vile and disgusting, and the act of a supremacist.

Personally, Amanda Marcotte and her ilk make me want to puke.


All over them.


All the best.

4:26 PM  
Blogger E. Steven Berkimer said...

12% of false rape claims in a country of 1.18 billion people. That's hundreds of thousands of innocent men destroyed at the least. That number isn't tiny or inconsequential,as the feminists will very soon learn.



Sorry, meant to comment on this. That 12% is of rape claims, so I don't think that will encompass 1.8 million men. I do agree that the number still isn't tiny or inconsequential though.

4:28 PM  
Blogger Rob said...

Isn't Amanda that same douchebag that got fired from Edward's political campaign for talking about... wait a second, I think I saved them:

"Q: What if Mary had taken Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit? A: You’d have to justify your misogyny with another ancient mythology." -- Amanda Marcotte (Former Blogmaster for John Edwards' 2008 Presidential Campaign)

And:

"the Catholic church is not about to let something like compassion for girls get in the way of using the state as an instrument to force women to bear more tithing Catholics." -- Amanda Marcotte (Former Blogmaster for John Edwards' 2008 Presidential Campaign)

AND:

[Regarding the Duke University False Rape Allegations Case] "Can't a few white boys sexually assault a black woman anymore without people getting all wound up about it? So unfair." -- Amanda Marcotte (Former Blogmaster for John Edwards' 2008 Presidential Campaign)

That this douchebag is still allowed a space to speak is what is amazing to me.

She's tainted trash... her only potency is as blog-mistress for a dying and much hated movement.

Good luck with that Women's Studies degree! It'll do you about as much good as listing you were an understudy to Dr. Mengele in 1942.

10:54 PM  
Blogger Fidelbogen said...

"That this douchebag is still allowed a space to speak is what is amazing to me. "

Evidently, whoever or whatever might have the power to "disallow" her, hasn't gotten busy yet. Or at any rate, not busy enough.

I have ideas about all that, of course. . .

12:26 AM  
Blogger trent13 said...

"the Catholic church is not about to let something like compassion for girls get in the way of using the state as an instrument to force women to bear more tithing Catholics." -- Amanda Marcotte (Former Blogmaster for John Edwards' 2008 Presidential Campaign)

I have heard this sentiment more than once from rabid feminists and as a Catholic anti-feminist female, few things make me more angry than this complete and utter willful mistinterpretation of Catholic doctrine, motives and social order. They have no concept of absolute truth, therefore, "religion is the opiate of the masses," and basically the Catholic hierarchy made the whole thing up in order to fabricate an income and control society.

Well, that's fine, Amanda, you believe that, and I'll believe the truth, and when we die and you are burning in hell for all eternity we'll see whose rights were worth vindicating, God or "wimminz."

10:15 AM  
Blogger Fidelbogen said...

Everything about her reeks of sheltered, upper-middleclass privilege.

And almost everything out of her mouth sounds like she's reading from a script of some kind.

I don't think that Amanda Marcotte has had much experience of the "real world" outside of the lefty-progressive-PC 'clique' that she runs with.

She doesn't know shit about how real-life poor/oppressed/downtrodden/working-class,etc..
people actually think!

Oh, and she has said a few other choice things about Catholics, too... heh, heh! ;)

6:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Based off of what that idiot known as Amanda said...if you talk about rape itself than you're a rapist?? All feminists are rapist? Liars?? Maneaters?? Haters?? What I said excluding "all" is true but, there's no need to generalize that assumption to the good people trying to protect rape victims and innocent men everywhere

8:38 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I could never be deparate enough to even think of touching Amanda Marcotte. She is totally ignorant and clueless to think any man would want to rape her. The majority of men have other pursuits to keep them busy.

10:23 PM  
Blogger Rob said...

Heh, I had direct links to where Amanda Marcotte posted those words on pandagon... it is interesting that all three are now missing.

Obviously, she is trying to hide her 15 minutes of national shame.

Glad I saved 'em for her!

Anyone heard from Trash Wilson lately?

7:03 PM  
Blogger Fidelbogen said...

"Heh, I had direct links to where Amanda Marcotte posted those words on pandagon... it is interesting that all three are now missing. "

Too bad you don't have any screen captures of those... (DO you..?)

That classic list of feminist horror quotes which has been circulating for the last 12 years needs to be updated and refreshed. . .

As for Amanda's shame. .well, she's one of the best people I have EVER seen for "putting her foot in it".

("It" being..dogshit..or her own mouth..or possibly both in that sequence!;)

But. . evidently she IS SHAMEABLE, hence, sensitive to outside opinion. It is during intoxicated moments of imagined invulnerability that Amanda, and her kind generally, say things (as we have seen) which later catch up with them in moments of sobriety - typically after somebody has rudely sobered them!

As for TW. . I am not her "keeper" (thank heavens!), so I have not "kept up" with her. But last I heard (which has been a while) she was retiring more and more to her private world of porno-chocolates and other arcane interests.

9:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A feminist woman talking about "ulterior motives" - that's rich.

4:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is becoming one of my favorite blogs ever. Outstanding, incisive and powerful writing.

8:53 PM  
Blogger Fidelbogen said...

@Anon8:53:

Oh please, you're making me blush - and that's not easy!

10:26 PM  
Anonymous dom said...

Her assertion that any man who "goes on about false rape accusations" has "ulterior motives" is akin to a stating that any woman that "goes on about false rape allegations" being unfounded has "ulterior motives".

Suggesting that men who, quite naturally, talk of the many false allegations of rape are looking to rape her. Is her & other feminists obsession with rape & their refusal to acknowledge false rape allegations as being a subject worthy of discussion indicative of women who WANT to be raped?

Any man who suggested that "rape culture" obsessed feminists were "secretly wanting to be raped" would rightly be attacked for doing so.

I think it's important to remember that feminists are primarily concerned with feminism & not the rights of women. "Rape culture" interests feminists, not victims of rape.

5:32 AM  
Blogger Fidelbogen said...

"I think it's important to remember that feminists are primarily concerned with feminism & not the rights of women. "Rape culture" interests feminists, not victims of rape."

I believe they use 'the rights of women' as a cover for their personal 'issues'.

11:36 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If people like Marcotte had their way, a man could be accused of rape after having consensual sex with a woman, if the woman so much as decided later that maybe it wasn't consensual. A man could be accused and convicted of harassment and assault if he so much as looked at a woman the wrong way, or said anything to her or interacted with her in any way, or even if he was in the same room as her, if she decided she 'felt threatened'. That's the brave new world of equality the feminists want for themselves. All the power and privileges, none of the responsibility.

6:22 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

About three quarter of my sense of hope for the world went down when I read the first post from Marcotte. Really.

1:57 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

As a female victim of female-perpetrated violent abuse I'd normally be supportive of your position.

But in this case I'm not, and I'm not sure why you've taken such a strong and hostile position here. There is, admittedly, very little known or studied within the field of criminology re: female-perpetrated crimes. This situation as described - a questionable proposal given very late at night while alone in an elevator after a speech decrying this very thing - is in victim selection/crime detection terms a huge red flag. And this is regardless of gender. It's not often publicized, and sadly even less often recognized by potential victims, but if the genders were reversed here a man is equally in danger, albeit more likely from theft, fraud, &/or criminal harassment (e.g. false accusations of rape) than bodily harm.

If you're alone with someone, and in a vulnerable position, and they engage in socially questionable behaviour REGARDLESS OF THE GENDER OF EITHER PARTICIPANT, your best response is to be on high alert until you can determine whether or not this person is a true threat, or just an inconsiderate or ill-mannered boor.

Oh, and most self-defence recommendations are to NOT respond to questionable behaviour with civility or politeness, as that often gives criminals a signal that you are an easy target.

12:09 PM  
Blogger Fidelbogen said...

@Anon, just prior:

It is hard to know who you are addressing here, since your comment has no bearing on the subject matter of the present post.

This is not about the "elevatorgate" scandal. No connection whatsoever. Please stay on topic.

Are you attempting to derail?

Nice try, feminist troll.

12:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

OK - I put my foot in my mouth in the last comment - I wasn't paying attention and commented on the wrong article (too many windows open - a bad habit!)

However, the same principles I mentioned above hold true for Ms. Marcotte's comment. She disingenuously asserts that "a tiny, inconsequential fraction of rape accusations are false", and you are correct to call her on that.

However, if you slightly modify her statement to remove the particulars: "But I also won't be alone in a room with a (insert gender or group here) that goes on and on about false (insert topic here) accusations. Said obsession indicates ulterior motives." is, from a crime prevention standpoint, imminently sensible.

As someone who has made a cause of standing up for men (and women) abused by women, I don't believe that she said any such thing as "any man who will not be silent about false rape accusation is a potential rapist".

What came across to me was the message that you should beware anyone who flogs only one side of any argument - particularly if that argument can be used to excuse abusive behaviour - and take sensible precautions.

That, btw, might include Ms. Marcotte herself, whom I would advise all MRAs to steer clear of, and wouldn't suggest being alone in a room with her either.

12:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

@Fidelbogen,
I presume the delay in posting my follow-up comment which explained my slip-up is because you are responding to it?

I hope that you'll re-read my original comment (even though it was inadvertantly (and yes, I'll admit carelessly) posted to the wrong article), and my follow-up comment, and realize that it wasn't intended to derail or subvert the discussion. Nor is it in any way an argument in support of any feminist position.

As a matter of fact, I found your page via a link in your article on "The Practice of Rhetorical Discipline" on thedamnedoldeman.com (while, incidentally, I was reading about the elevator incident, and was intending to comment on that article). I think it's a brilliant article, and I intend to use it for my own campaign to raise awareness of female offenders and abusers - particularly sexual abuse by females.

However, I believe that you've neglected to follow your own advice and provided a "grappling point" in this article on Amanda Marcotte's comment. I'm not saying this to be mean or hostile when I say that your article above (and your "feminist troll" comment) comes across even to me as a knee-jerk response, and not particularly well thought out. When I first followed the link I thought it had been included as an example of what not to do. I was surprised - and dismayed - to read that it was one of your own.

As someone who has started to wade into the radical feminist waters to refute their false and harmful assertions, I particularly appreciated your advice that it is critically important not to let down one's own side. I fear that's what you've done with this article.

For the record, I'm pretty much the furthest you could get from a "feminist troll". And doesn't calling anyone a "feminist troll" - even if they are one - create yet another "grappling point"?

This is, of course, your website for you to do whatever you'd like with. However, in light of my admission that my first post was a mistake, how about you either publish my follow-up comments, or just remove the mistaken post and your (hopefully now reconsidered) accusation of me as a "feminist troll"?

1:16 PM  
Blogger Fidelbogen said...

There is nothing wrong with flogging one side of an argument, if it is the only way to make that side heard in the first place. This is a war, and it is the nature of any war that you only flog one side of the argument -- YOUR side.

All right, so in effect you are saying it is okay to classify somebody as a potential rapist on account of their political conviction.

I.E. if you think that false accusation of rape is a monstrously evil thing which is destroying society and you won't shut the fuck up about it, then you are a potential rapist.

Thank you for making your position clear.

1:21 PM  
Blogger Fidelbogen said...

I don't live next to the computer 24-7, so don't be surprised if comments don't always get posted right away. I could be away for hours, even days. . .

As for your point about grappling points -- no, I don't believe I have offered any, or none to worry about. In light of strategic calculations, I have done everything according to . . . calculation.

The reason I linked to this post in the "rhetorical discipline" article is, as you may have overlooked, to offer an example of "the art of sounding angry."

In other words, it was an example of breaking the rules in a calculated way.

BTW, Amanda Marcotte was undoubtedly made aware of this post. And interestingly, her original statement on Slate.com (the screen cap), has disappeared for some reason.

Looks like I inflicted some mental pain on a person who deserved it.

2:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, it seems my misplaced earliest post touched a nerve for you that I in no way intended, and for that I apologize.

And I'll choose to disregard the label of "feminist troll" (if you knew me you'd realize how funny that is - I can hear several people who do laughing their heads off), as touched nerves will sometimes produce that.

Re: my comment "I presume the delay in posting my follow-up comment which explained my slip-up is because you are responding to it?", that was only becuase your reply at 1:21 was posted several minutes before my earlier comment from 1:16 appeared - standard problem when posters are posting over each other's last responses, as I believe this was.

As for your assertions that "All right, so in effect you are saying it is okay to classify somebody as a potential rapist on account of their political conviction.

I.E. if you think that false accusation of rape is a monstrously evil thing which is destroying society and you won't shut the fuck up about it, then you are a potential rapist."


... I honestly don't understand how you think my earlier statements support that, when nothing could be further from the truth.

However, it would appear that nothing good will come out of continueing this conversation, which seems to have become a 'fight' where none was intended, so I wish you well and bid you good night.

8:16 PM  
Blogger Fidelbogen said...

My summary of your "position" was actually a summary of Amanda Marcotte's position. But since you appeared to be (somewhat) "exonerating" her, I took you to be rubberstamping her attitude at one remove.

When somebody appears to be excusing somebody as inexcusable as Amanda Marcotte, it tends to pulls my tripwire.

8:49 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home