Monday, 22 September 2014

An Open Letter to Emma Watson

http://naughtynerdess.tumblr.com/post/98184739316/an-open-letter-to-emma-watson

Dear Emma Watson,

I was not raised a celebrity. I can say that my life has been very different from yours. I am a woman living in America. I have not attended a fine University like Brown as you did. I have known abuse, I have been molested. I have known hardship and depression. But there is something you should know. I don’t need feminism.

Maybe you can’t understand why this might be so. How someone like me who has in the past been suicidal and faced such turmoil could say that I do not need something that is supposed to help the whole world.
I want you to know that I am neither religious nor someone politically conservative, and I say this because many have accused me of this stance for merely disagreeing with feminism. Your idea of feminism is certainly beautiful, but it is not the reality of the woman’s movement today nor was it the reality of the past.

That is what saddens me. When I was younger I got it into my head that I needed to be strong and empowered and eventually I got there, but when I finally met other feminists I did not see a group of strong self-reliant women infront of me. I saw women who wanted others to do the work for them.

They did not understand that empowerment is something that only you can bring to yourself. People can talk all day about women doing great things. People can give them thousands of dollars of grant money, but it all means nothing if these women won’t do the work themselves. Therein lies the problem of the feminist ideology. It preaches that we must empower women but never asks women to empower themselves or demands that they become capable and self-reliant.

I don’t think that many in the west disagree that women are deserving of all the rights and privileges of men. The truth is far more sinister. I don’t often hear men say that women don’t deserve these things by any stretch of the imagination. The majority of people I hear saying that women are oppressed are feminists.

I don’t see it in the actions of men in the population save for the percentage of the population that engages in violent crime. There will always be meanspirited people. There will always be some people that commit violent acts against their fellow humans, and that is not gendered. Feminism can not fix these things.

You can not fix the portion of humanity that does not care about others and do not care if people are harmed. They are not people that can be persuaded.

The reason that women detach themselves from the label of feminist, has nothing to do with the idea of women’s rights being radical. It isn’t, it makes logical sense. The problem lies with the actions of feminists and actions going beyond achieving the privileges men have. There are man-hating feminists and the narrative that men can stop things like sexual assault is what starts it.

When you say that men can stop sexual assault on their own you are imagining men as one big group that congregates together and can stop the sociopathic individuals that predate on others. Sexual assault is not a mistake, or a lapse in judgment. It is not something learned or taught to rapists by society. It is instead a rejection of society. It persists in spite of those who preach equal treatment.

This narrative erases victims of female predators who operate like male sexual predators and exist in greater numbers than you would expect. The problem is that because feminism preaches that men are the abusers that can stop rape, it erases men and women who are victimized by women. Even worse, these women do not face jail time equal to that of their male counterparts. That is not equal treatment and that is not justice.

Painting women as victims does not help them to be seen as the equals of men. It makes them appear weak which is contrary to that which feminism says it wants to accomplish. Because of that you have female predators out of jail after only a few months ready to prey on their next victim.

This is not the story that modern feminism wishes to tell. It is not the story that it wishes to acknowledge. It won’t mention women in “oppressed” countries rising to the occasion in spite of everything. It won’t mention that women in these “oppressed” countries enter STEM fields in greater number to those of the west or that many of them are strong in their own right. Feminism didn’t make them so.

Instead feminism preaches, Look at those women, they are victims, we have to get men to save them. Is that not the worst thing you could do? Are you not continuing gender stereotypes in assuming that men need to be the ones to empower women? Is it not harmful to tell a woman that she is not strong enough on her own, and that she needs all these other women to empower her?

Women won’t identify as feminists because the women within feminism rely so much on the sisterhood that they do not pursue self-reliance. These women do not heal when they’ve been victimized because the sisterhood tells them that it’s fine to live as a perpetual victim instead of a survivor.

These feminists do not live up to your lofty ideals. The feminists who govern these groups are often corrupt and profit directly from keeping women victims. They profit from the narrative that men are the aggressors and women are victims.

If you are looking for gender equality in them you will not find it. This is the problem. The majority of women feel alienated from modern feminism because it is not providing the equality that many of them so desperately crave and it ignores the women who use this ideology to further their own ends.

Instead it is the cause for much of the disparity. Policies meant to help women, fail in one major respect. Because they often assume women in general to have a kind of moral superiority. It does not assume that women can act immorally in ways that are equivalent to men. Laws like the Violence against women act in the United States presume men to be the aggressor even when men are calling to report violence against them by their partners.

If you want to help women to be seen as equal to men, we must acknowledge that they are just as capable of vice as their male counterparts and must face equal consequences. If you want real equality, you must dismantle gender bias against men and benevolent sexism against women perpetuated by the legal system.

Women must be willing to take the higher paying dangerous jobs men take. They must be willing to be held accountable and we must be willing to hold them accountable in the way we hold men to be accountable.
We must acknowledge that the disparity mentioned most often by feminists can be accounted for, by things like life choices and economic mobility. Poverty accounts for much of the problems of third world countries. War brings poverty and violence to these countries, harming men and women in different, but equally horrific ways. Yet women are the ones most likely to receive money and aid.

Child brides arise out of necessity first in impoverished countries. Families can not afford to feed all of their children and as a result are married off young to keep families afloat. In the minds of those parents they are making certain that she is fed and clothed. You want to help women? Then acknowledge that the problem is a toxic mix of ignorance, tradition, and crippling poverty in countries that are often war-torn that drive these problems and not a lack of chivalry.

It is difficult for women to even dream of a future when their families can barely afford to feed them. How can women get ahead when their clothes are rotting off their bodies and their brothers are being drawn into war because it’s their only hope of making some kind of change.

Feminism can not put food on their tables or stop those wars. Because it is attempting to treat the symptoms of these problems and not the disease. You want to help people? Then wake up! We don’t need chivary! We need honesty! Life is hell for the impoverished, it cultivates victims and criminal behavior.

Those people are in pain, and the discussion as to how to help them begins when we have honest discussions about how men and women both suffer in equal degrees, but the source is this toxic mix of human problems that we’ve yet to solve. Some of which we may never solve. Treating the symptoms is failing.

We must approach the source and come to creative solutions, because as it stands people are dividing themselves over the belief that everyone can be an oppressor or that people are being oppressed in the first world. The wage gap has long since been debunked. Single childless women often out earn men because they make different choices now. They can wait longer to have children due to technological advances, so they make career orientated decisions that allow them to get ahead.

The greatest determination of poverty for a woman is how many children she has and when she has them. Women often make work decisions based upon wanting to spend time with her children. So she’s more likely to take time off to tend to her sick children, to leave work early to pick up the kids, or to get them to things like soccer practice.

This all adds up and that is a major contributor to the disparity in the wage gap and not gender discrimination. When you compare many of the well paying jobs men take to something like being a kindergarten teacher, there is an obvious difference in pay. The studies speaking of a massive pay gap rely on lifetime studies which don’t account for differences in job, whether these women have children, or choose careers that pay less but make them happy.

The key to aiding this problem may well be in making birth control available to men and women and allowing them to choose when to be parents. That will also reduce the population in many problem areas and make it possible for people to do better with the same amount of resources. But it will be difficult and many religious groups simply will not allow it.

But you will likely find the key to aiding poverty stricken people is in advancing science and technology overall, and in safe, effective, affordable, and readily available birth control methods for men and women. The recognition of science and it’s continued progression is the only thing that can move us in that direction.

So I ask that instead of funding campaigns to promote chivalrous behavior in men, that you fund the people that will make that line of reasoning obsolete. I ask that you fund science and technology.
Thank you for your time and I hope that you will consider what I have written.

Sincerely,
Rachel Marie Edwards

Upworthy: An SJW propaganda piece?

Wow. I just dealt with the editor at Upworthy. And he is a slimy piece of work.

"I'm Editor-at-Large at Upworthy.com. I make your stuff go viral every once in a while."
http://upworthy.com/adam-mordecai

Suddenly, it all makes sense. I mean we suspected that the SJWs had taken over these websites, but to actually speak to one...

Here's his approach to free speech:

"The first person to say "but what about black on black crime" gets a black and white banning. "

He posted this link on FB: http://www.upworthy.com/her-voice-might-tremble-but-emma-watsons-message-is-strong-and-clear?c=ag

I saw the bit where Emma seems bewildered by why anyone would think Feminists hate men so i linked a bunch of quotes by feminists on why they hate all men: http://oratorasaurus.tumblr.com/post/53087260843/lzbth-im-not-a-feminist-why-because-i

and he replied with .. ahh he's edited it now. That bastard.

Oh well. It was something like: " You mean quotes from radical feminism from the 80s that have no relevance "

And I replied with

Adam Mordecai

No, I mean the quotes from writers who were regarded as Feminists. There's no special category you get to use, to erase them from history. You remind me of those earnest communists I've met who claim communism has never harmed anyone.
__________________

...  communism has never harmed anyone? What about Stalin? He killed millions!

Oh, he wasn't a true Scotsman - I mean Communist.

He was recognised as such world wide by communists. They printed his books, and quoted his words.

Doesn't count.

Mao? Pol Pot?

Nope. Not a True Communist. He said things I don't like, so he's not relevant.

So what's a true Communist?

Someone who agrees with me, of course!

"no true scotsman"





You made what could be called an appeal to purity as a way to dismiss relevant criticisms or flaws of your argument.

In this form of faulty reasoning one's belief is rendered unfalsifiable because no matter how compelling the evidence is, one simply shifts the goalposts so that it wouldn't apply to a supposedly 'true' example. This kind of post-rationalization is a way of avoiding valid criticisms of one's argument.

Example: Angus declares that Scotsmen do not put sugar on their porridge, to which Lachlan points out that he is a Scotsman and puts sugar on his porridge. Furious, like a true Scot, Angus yells that no true Scotsman sugars his porridge.

Adam Mordecai Right, but those views as feminists don't define the entire movement, that is radical feminism a distinctly different brand than the rest of feminism and is the antithesis of what Emma Watson is talking about. You are basically making the same argument to criticize my criticism, as you simultaneously say all feminism is this. Which it isn't.

"those views as feminists don't define the entire movement"

Except Emma seems bewildered by why anyone would think Feminists were man-hating. Because they were, and as anyone who knows Tumblr or Chanty Binx can testify, still are.. if anything, the Valerie Solanas fan clubs and Femitheist groupies imply it's becoming even more socially acceptable.

To claim Dworkin and MacKinnon were these weird outliers is just absurd. They were seen as representatives to the point where they were allowed to draft legislation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catharine_MacKinnon#Antipornography_ordinances

Where were the protests from 'mainstream' feminists that these people were allowed to represent them? There was silence. Two people who had argued that all heterosexual women were gender traitors encountered no opposition.. except from non-Feminists.

"If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the Earth. I think this will be accompanied by an evolutionary process that will result in a drastic reduction of the population of males." —Mary Daly, former Professor at Boston College, 2001.

Mary Daly occupied an important position: teaching Boston College, a Jesuit-run institution, for 33 years. She also advocated genocide.

Genocide. If you can think of another movement whose radicals advocate genocide, without being arrested, without protests, without even a strongly worded letter from the 'mainstream', please be my guest. And that tradition has continued into Femitheist's websites and video clips, and continues into further sales of "The Female Man" via digital download.

"All men are rapists and that’s all they are"
— Marilyn French, Authoress; (later, advisoress to Al Gore’s Presidential Campaign.)

Oh yes, she wasn't anyone important or 'mainstream' now was she?

Something more recent?

"All men are good for is ****ing, and running over with a truck".

Statement made by A University of Maine Feminist Administrator, quoted by Richard Dinsmore, who brought a successful civil suit against the University in the amount of $600,000. Richard had protested the quote; was dismissed thereafter on the grounds of harassment; and responded by bringing suit against the University 1995 settlement.

I imagine Feminists were big on defending him! I mean 1995, surely that's recent enough! Feminists would have been all over that... because.. Feminism is about equality... ahhh no, i can't do it, the laughing is now causing internal injuries and i fear my spleen has fallen out the window.

No, you are right, Feminism has changed


and today's feminists care about men

and their pain

and the ones who don't are just freak outliers


I expect he'll either delete my comments or ban me. There's no chance in hell he'll honestly debate my points. Honesty is not what Feminists DO, nowadays.

The SJWs are a rancid bunch.

Wednesday, 17 September 2014

Bees. Why did it have to be bees?





rasputin:
Portuguese designer Susana Soares has developed a device for detecting cancer and other serious diseases using trained bees. The bees are placed in a glass chamber into which the patient exhales; the bees fly into a smaller secondary chamber if they detect cancer.

Scientists have found that honey bees - Apis mellifera - have an extraordinary sense of smell that is more acute than that of a sniffer dog and can detect airborne molecules in the parts-per-trillion range.

Bees can be trained to detect specific chemical odours, including the biomarkers associated with diseases such as tuberculosis, lung, skin and pancreatic cancer.
sexhaver: breathe into the BEE ORB to reveal your fate



and so it begins...


there can be no escape

No!

Monday, 15 September 2014

Feminist proposes men to be removed from Britain. And is taken seriously.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/15/women-of-britain-own-feminist-party-sweden

"When our children and grandchildren look back at the Sun’s page 3 (for I have no doubt its days are numbered) they’ll see it in much the same way as we watch the casual sexism in Mad Men now"



So they'll look at a topless woman and decide, hey, that's sexist, because pictures of topless men are ... never seen? Never desired? What?



" I say the Scots shouldn’t be the only ones who should have their fun: women of Britain, it’s time for us to follow Sweden’s example by forming our own party to represent our interests in government."



OH, hang on: I thought Feminism was about equality? With men? As in it fights for both of them? But you just said you want a party that only represents 50% of the nation's interests. Only people with vaginas. That's it.



How does that differ from a political party that only represents white people?



"Women of colour, and working-class and LGBT women, would be at the centre of the party."



Oh, so that's how it's different. It would be LESS meritocratic! You'd work out privilege points and give the best positions to people with the highest scores! Yes, that'll work brilliantly! Putin must be trembling at the thought!



"Our primary aim would be to ensure female autonomy: that no women should be economically dependent on men"



Great! Men will be glad to hear that. No more alimony! No more child support!



"confined by sexist social norms"



Yay! No more male only conscription into front lines! Women will get to fill the body bags too! This is wonderful!



" at risk of violence"



err?



"no women should be at risk of violence"



What? How the hell is that going to work? Will you have angels following women around, shielding them from all harm? Do you not understand how evil works? That no-one has ever figured out how to end it? That men are certainly at risk of violence? So if currently the world is ruled by men, and they certainly aren't safe, how are you going to do a better job?

No, not just better: a perfect job. You say NO woman should be at risk of violence.



NOT "no-one should be at risk of violence". .. "no woman". You don't care if men are at risk of violence. They don't exist, except as your enemy. You conceive of them as the source of all wickedness, and if you just get rid of them, of COURSE there can be no violence.



Forget about what those women in woman dominated environments have said about women being violent; let's ignore the fact that lesbian rape and lesbian domestic violence is just as high as in the straight relationships.



That's inconvenient, ergo, it doesn't exist.



So your Feminist Party would have to follow the Scottish example and secede from the world. All the men would have to go.



I think you might find a surprising amount of resistance to that idea.




"Under a feminist party there would be no headlines about equal pay taking another 60 years to be realised"



No, presumably this fascist state would have headlines with "Victory! victory! Victory!" "MINIPROD PLEDGE NO REDUCTION IN 30 GRAMME CHOCOLATE RATION 1984".



Because the gender wage gap is a myth, and you know it. No reputable economist supports the idea it still exists. It would be illegal. If you have any evidence, it's your duty to report it - but you don't, you won't, it's just a useful lie to manipulate the fear and hatred of women towards men.



"The Jews are poisoning the wells!" goes the cry. "they are stealing our children!"



It's Blood libel and you damn well know it.



" full reproductive rights for all."

LIAR!



For all implies men too. There's not a snowflakes chance in hell of your Femtopia granting man any rights, let alone reproductive ones. Hell, thanks to Feminism, a boy can be raped, and his rapist awarded not only the custody of the boy's offspring, but CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENTS FROM THE CHILD.



"There would be a minister for women of colour, a minister for working-class women, and a minister for LGBT women."



Anything for men? No? BECAUSE FEMINISM IS ABOUT EQUALITY AND WE ARE FIGHTING SOOO HARD FOR GAY MEN TOOOOO..



I would say "see you in Hell" but I am an atheist, so I shall simply hope that some future advanced civilisation solves the problems of entropy, granting eternal life to everyone ever born, finds you, and gives you exactly what you deserve.



Say hi to that snowflake.

Objectification

According to Feminists,
it is impossible to be a free agent,
a sapient being,
unless you are not desirable to men.
whoneedsfeminism: I need feminism because we are subjects, not sexual objects

Feminists say "men think women are objects".



You don't give an object two Nobel prizes.




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Curie


or give it the power to have men decapitated


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_I_of_England


or to rewrite laws and start wars.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Thatcher

Women who aren't Feminists don't know to be weak.




http://rarehistoricalphotos.com/smart-beautiful-deadly-19-year-old-russian-sniper-roza-shanina-54-confirmed-kills/


They don't need to be empowered.




They don't need to be saved.




http://military.wikia.com/wiki/Women_Airforce_Service_Pilots

No-one needs Feminism.

They need to feel their courage.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svetlana_Savitskaya


To fight besides men, united, against the evils of the world




http://tribune.com.pk/story/761757/kurdish-female-fighters-face-is-militants-in-iraqs-north/


instead of against men, knowing only hate for men...




http://bloviatingzeppelin.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Catholic-Archbishop-Assailed-3.jpg
http://bloviatingzeppelin.net/tags/archbishop-andre-joseph-leonard/





See Also:


NSFW: Why do Feminists hate sex?

Rubbery Under Arms

"The fact that you can only and absolutely focus on school shootings, which are very emotional and gripping events, and avoid discussing mass killings at schools and churches and on airplanes and in night clubs and other places that did NOT involve firearms indicates that you are either a shill for some anti-gun group or you are simply someone who has absolutely swallowed the propaganda being distributed about guns."


I'm trying to think of any of those mass-killing in Australia.

Nope. Maybe I was asleep or something?


"Australia has successfully implemented strict gun control."

Yep. We could see us heading down the American path. We said Nope.

" Australia’s rape rate (as reported by Australian government) is **fourteen times higher** than the rape rate in the U.S."

 If true (and no reference is ever given so I'm not going to bother debunking if you can't be bothered presenting anything to check in the first place), then there's still no connection.

Most rapes happen from people you know.

Are you actually advising people to carry a drawn weapon at all times in case their spouses or friends attack them?

You realise almost all rapes are actually carried out by a minority, our Aboriginal population, which is why we staged The Intervention, which is effectively martial law for one racial group?

"Australians cannot even carry mace or tazers or **fucking walking sticks**"

Tazers are weapons, yes. It's pretty easy to attack someone with them, harder to defend. They kill people. And either this website is lying or pepper spray is legal in WA. State laws vary.

But walking sticks? I'm sorry, what the hell are you on about? Seriously?



" or _screwdrivers_. There is a higher penalty for carrying a screwdriver “without a lawful reason” in Australia than there is for mugging someone unarmed."

 Yeah. You can't just carry burglary tools. Are you on your way to a job? That's fine. Going to fix a friend's door? Easy to check, police call friend and ask about door. Context matters.

Screwdrivers are a great murder weapon btw, so if you do see someone on the street walking, screwdriver in hand.. get the fuck away.

Even if they are just going to repair something, they can trip and impale themselves or someone else. It should be on a belt or in a bag, not in someone's bloody paws.


"You will literally face higher legal penalties for walking down the street with a screwdriver in your hand to fix your neighbor’s screen door than you would if you mug that neighbor and take their wallet and phone."

Literally, you will not.

Another source: http://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/lz/c/a/summary%20offences%20act%201953.aspx

http://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/A/SUMMARY%20OFFENCES%20ACT%201953/CURRENT/1953.55.UN.RTF

21C—Offensive weapons and dangerous articles etc
(1) A person who, without lawful excuse— (a) carries an offensive weapon or an article of disguise; or (b) has possession of an implement of housebreaking, is guilty of an offence.

Maximum penalty: $2 500 or imprisonment for 6 months.

http://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/A/CRIMINAL%20LAW%20CONSOLIDATION%20ACT%201935.aspx

http://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/A/CRIMINAL%20LAW%20CONSOLIDATION%20ACT%201935/CURRENT/1935.2252.UN.RTF

Division 3—Robbery
137—Robbery
(1) A person who commits theft is guilty of robbery if—
(a) the person—
(i) uses force, or threatens to use force, against another in order to commit the theft; or
(ii) uses force, or threatens to use force, against another in order to escape from the scene of the offence; and
(b) the force is used, or the threat is made, at the time of, or immediately before or after, the theft.
Maximum penalty:

(a) for a basic offence—imprisonment for 15 years;

(b) for an aggravated offence—imprisonment for life.



"Gun crime has not dropped dramatically in Australia since the implementation of gun control."

Australia's always had gun control. Every time new weapons have been invented, it's only been tightened.

(We only started in 1900 btw, so if you can find some law since Federation saying you can own any weapon, feel free) 

We tightened it up a bit. The problem is that guns get shipped in from overseas because, i dunno, some countries make an awful lot of them, not naming any names, we're all friends here AMERICA but you don't seem to be very good at keeping control of the weapons you make.

I'm just saying. I've seen footage of your gun shows. Gang guy rocks up, shows ID, other dude pays in cash, later than afternoon gang kills other gang in totally coincidental homicide, golly geee!

http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/publications.nsf/key/Gunviolence:anupdate/$File/e-brief.gun+violence.feb12.pdf

Hmm. Looks like in NSW the line for gun crime is.. going down??



Sunday, 14 September 2014

How has rape culture been debunked?

Reblogged from http://feminists-against-women.tumblr.com/post/97528011384/how-has-rape-culture-been-debunked


Anonymous Bitched:


How has rape culture been debunked?
check-your-privilege-feminists replied:

RAINN has officially dismantled feminist rape culture hysteria.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKgrYVtYSCk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNsJ1DhqQ-s

The “1 in 4 Women will be sexually assaulted” myth:

IF the one-in-four statistic is correct—it is sometimes modified to “one-in-five to one-in-four”—campus rape represents a crime wave of unprecedented proportionsNo crime, much less one as serious as rape, has a victimization rate remotely approaching 20 or 25 percent, even over many years. The 2006 violent crime rate in Detroit, one of the most violent cities in America, was 2,400 murders, rapes, robberies, and aggravated assaults per 100,000 inhabitants—a rate of 2.4 percent. The one-in-four statistic would mean that every year, millions of young women graduate who have suffered the most terrifying assault, short of murder, that a woman can experience. Such a crime wave would require nothing less than a state of emergency—Take Back the Night rallies and 24-hour hotlines would hardly be adequate to counter this tsunami of sexual violence. Admissions policies letting in tens of thousands of vicious criminals would require a complete revision, perhaps banning boys entirely.

— Heather Mac Donald, "The Campus Rape Myth".

This alleged “statistic” was culled from a survey of 3,000 college women in 1982, conducted by Ms. Magazine.  These women were asked only three questions:

  1. Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn’t want to because a man gave you alcohol or drugs?
  2. Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn’t want to because a man threatened or used some degree of physical force to make you?
  3. Have you had sexual acts when you didn’t want to because a man threatened to use some degree of physical force to make you?
The trouble is, many of the women the survey counted as “victims” did not actually feel that they had been raped, especially not the entire third of the alleged “victims” that continued to have a consensual sexual relationship with their supposed attacker.  Others that had consensual one-night-stands that they later regretted were also counted as “victims”.

When you have to lie about the prevalence of a crime, you’re not doing women any favors.

Feminism is supposed to be empowering, not to send us cowering.

Rape is not the “epidemic” that people are trying to claim it is.  It has actually decreased dramatically in the past few decades - up to 80% since 1979despite an increase in the willingness of victims to report them.  This is even further supported by data directly from the U.S. Bureau of Justice.

The only thing that HAS been increasing are FALSE reports of rape, which do a lot more harm to the lives of others than you may want to believe.

If this supposedly causes rape

image

Then so would this

image

because let’s not forget that women are just as capable of becoming rapists as men.

There is no rape culture. We do not live in a society that condones rape. Rape is considered to be one of the top criminal offenses. Literally no one supports it here in America or any developed Western country.