Roosh V. Wants To Legalize Rape

Roosh V. Wants To Legalize Rape

The Roosh V. article that pushes for legalizing rape on private property
939
views

So maybe it didn't have to be feministic, realistic, something that could happen in the near future, or even progressive, but I figured that an article entitled “How to Stop Rape” would at least have a solid plan. Instead, as I read through the article and felt my face slowly getting hotter as each word threw blame, unrealistic expectations and misogyny at rape victims, I was met by a sort of backwards thinking people usually joke about.

“How to Stop Rape” is an article by a blogger who goes by the name Roosh V. He starts by saying that from a young age, men are told not to grow up and become rapists, which he finds to be unfair. Then, the transfer of a lifetime happens as he begins to blame women who have been raped of putting themselves in situations where it was obviously going to happen — saying they should have known better than to be there, and that really, they should have expected it. Then, as the article continues, he proposed the plan:

“I thought about this problem and am sure I have the solution: make rape legal if done on private property. I propose that we make the violent taking of a woman not punishable by law when done off public grounds.”

He chooses private property because typically, according to the Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network, four out of every five victims are assaulted by somebody they know. Completely ignoring the actions of the men involved, Roosh V. talks about how he “saw women wholly unconcerned with their own safety and the character of men they developed intimate relationships with.” He is suggesting that women should be more careful about who they develop relationships with and always be on the lookout. And what a great life that sounds like, right? Always living under the fear that every man on the street, every man you meet at a party, every man you work with, every man your family introduces you to, every man in your family, could be someone who could potentially rape you. Women aren’t unconcerned when forming these attachments, they’re just being human — displaying the natural need to form bonds and friendships. How can you blame them for that when someone decides they want more than they are allowed to get, and forcibly takes it?

The article gets worse.

He tries to make his madness seem logical, saying that, “if rape becomes legal under my proposal, a girl will protect her body in the same manner that she protects her purse and smartphone. If rape becomes legal, a girl will not enter an impaired state of mind where she can’t resist being dragged off to a bedroom with a man who she is unsure of—she’ll scream, yell, or kick at his attempt while bystanders are still around. If rape becomes legal, she will never be unchaperoned with a man she doesn’t want to sleep with. After several months of advertising this law throughout the land, rape would be virtually eliminated on the first day it is applied.” There are so many things wrong with this that I have to take it sentence by sentence.

1. A girl will protect her body in the same manner that she protects her purse? I’ve seen women on trains sitting and holding their purses against them, and still someone will wait until the train stops, wrench it out of their hands, and make a dash for the closing doors. And, why is it the woman’s job to constantly be on high alert? Why can there be no push for rape to stop, so that she can live without fear?

2. The second sentence is insinuating that it’s a girls fault for getting drunk and allowing some man to drag her off to his bedroom. Roosh V. literally uses the word dragging. What willing participant every has to be dragged somewhere?!

3. Really? Chaperoned? So I guess we’re traveling back in time to when women weren’t allowed outside unless they were chaperoned. The point of a chaperone takes away all autonomy and saying women need one is so demeaning. As if to say that a 40 year-old woman still needs her daddy to walk her to the grocery store.

4. He started by saying rape would be legal on private property, and ends with saying that this new law will end all rape. How? That makes no sense. When marijuana dispensaries started, did people stop smoking weed? No! They got licensing so they could do it legally. Imagine how much easier it would be for rapists to wait around outside their houses and drag someone inside, where it would be legal for them to force them into their beds? And even worse, considering most rapes happen between two people who know each other, it would be legal for a woman to be raped by her co-worker, classmate, friend or family member as long as it was done within the house.

Some in the comments section say that Roosh V. is being satirical, but someone who has never labeled himself as a satirical writer nor told those who have backlashed against this article that he was joking is being satirical. Also, someone who has other articles where he bashes women and says things like this:

“While every feminist likes to repeat the phrase ‘No means no,’ it depends on context. Here’s a guide:

‘No’ when you try to take off her jeans or shirt means… ‘You need to turn me on a lot more.’

‘No’ when you try to take off her bra means… ‘Try again in five minutes.’

‘No’ when you try to take off her panties means… ‘Don’t give up now!’”

That is not satire.

That is not funny.

And that is the world rape victims, both men and women, live in. Afraid of people like this who blame the victim and try to further restrict them or kick them while they’re down.

This isn’t the change we need.

Cover Image Credit: Ms. Magazine

Popular Right Now

I'm The Girl Who'd Rather Raise A Family Than A Feminist Protest Sign

You raise your protest picket signs and I’ll raise my white picket fence.
438632
views

Social Media feeds are constantly filled with quotes on women's rights, protests with mobs of women, and an array of cleverly worded picket signs.

Good for them, standing up for their beliefs and opinions. Will I be joining my tight-knit family of the same gender?

Nope, no thank you.

Don't get me wrong, I am not going to be oblivious to my history and the advancements that women have fought to achieve. I am aware that the strides made by many women before me have provided us with voting rights, a voice, equality, and equal pay in the workforce.

SEE ALSO: To The Girl Who Would Rather Raise A Family Than A Feminist Protest Sign

For that, I am deeply thankful. But at this day in age, I know more female managers in the workforce than male. I know more women in business than men. I know more female students in STEM programs than male students. So what’s with all the hype? We are girl bosses, we can run the world, we don’t need to fight the system anymore.

Please stop.

Because it is insulting to the rest of us girls who are okay with being homemakers, wives, or stay-at-home moms. It's dividing our sisterhood, and it needs to stop.

All these protests and strong statements make us feel like now we HAVE to obtain a power position in our career. It's our rightful duty to our sisters. And if we do not, we are a disappointment to the gender and it makes us look weak.

Weak to the point where I feel ashamed to say to a friend “I want to be a stay at home mom someday.” Then have them look at me like I must have been brain-washed by a man because that can be the only explanation. I'm tired of feeling belittled for being a traditionalist.

Why?

Because why should I feel bad for wanting to create a comfortable home for my future family, cooking for my husband, being a soccer mom, keeping my house tidy? Because honestly, I cannot wait.

I will have no problem taking my future husband’s last name, and following his lead.

The Bible appoints men to be the head of a family, and for wives to submit to their husbands. (This can be interpreted in so many ways, so don't get your panties in a bunch at the word “submit”). God specifically made women to be gentle and caring, and we should not be afraid to embrace that. God created men to be leaders with the strength to carry the weight of a family.

However, in no way does this mean that the roles cannot be flipped. If you want to take on the responsibility, by all means, you go girl. But for me personally? I'm sensitive, I cry during horror movies, I'm afraid of basements and dark rooms. I, in no way, am strong enough to take on the tasks that men have been appointed to. And I'm okay with that.

So please, let me look forward to baking cookies for bake sales and driving a mom car.

And I'll support you in your endeavors and climb to the top of the corporate ladder. It doesn't matter what side you are on as long as we support each other, because we all need some girl power.

Cover Image Credit: Unsplash

Related Content

Connect with a generation
of new voices.

We are students, thinkers, influencers, and communities sharing our ideas with the world. Join our platform to create and discover content that actually matters to you.

Learn more Start Creating

Cardi B And Other Celebs Are Getting Political, But It’s Not As Bad Of An Idea As You Think

Celebrities push teens through the political door and start their interest in politics, as well as encourage voting every election season.

67
views

With the government shutdown persisting, celebs such as the one and only Cardi B have spoken out with their opinions. I watched Cardi's Instagram rant about it, and for me, it raised a larger question — should celebrities be involved in politics?

Besides the current government debate, Kim Kardashian met with the President recently to display her political views surrounding prison reform, and she received both praise and hatred for it. Was it okay for her to be making such a move?

Yes, it's totally okay — and for good reason.

First, if we allowed the silencing of celebrities' opinions, we'd be violating constitutional rights. Sure, not every celebrity is well-informed or speaks intelligently, but young or old, educated or not, poor or rich, every American has the right to speak freely and vote freely.

It's easy to say, "What does Kim know about policy? She needs to shut up," but considering the bigger implications of silencing every questionable opinion, it's dangerous.

Second, celebrities having such vocal power is no different from political figures having vocal power. Maybe younger generations will look up to Lady Gaga for worldly advice when she speaks, but older generations look at presidents and congressmen the same way.

Yes, I know you're thinking, "Yeah, that's because presidents and congressmen have actual political experience." The issue with that justification is that political experience and/or a law degree don't mean a person will have an informed opinion or make informed decisions. Law degrees are given to people who argue best, not to those who research best.

As for politics, I would strongly argue that politics are far more influenced by feelings than logical reasoning or data. And because of this, a poor uneducated illiterate person could hold the exact same political opinions as a wealthy Harvard graduate.

And third, the power of celebrities has proven to be highly beneficial in the bipartisan sense for younger generations. Celebrities push teens through the political door and start their interest in politics, as well as encourage voting every election season. After Taylor Swift encouraged her fans to vote on Instagram, approximately 170,000 people registered to vote within the same 48 hours.

If you still would rather not listen to Cardi B talking about the government shutdown, that's okay! It's your right to not listen. But that doesn't mean we should diminish her right to speak.

Related Content

Facebook Comments