Quote:
Originally Posted by Buster
I re-read the article to ensure I wasn't mis-interpreting it myself. I wasn't.
He is making a point that he describes as satire. I would probably label it as an absurdity. In either case, he is definitely NOT advocating for "legalizing rape." When this article came out it accomplished two things: first it got Roosh all the attention he was seeking, and two it caused the social justice types ... social justice nannies ... among the Social Justice set ...
|
You were.
Or you mis-interpreted my post. It's most definitely satire, as his advocacy for the legalisation of rape is not meant as literal but is meant to shock people into thought (much like, not sure if it was you but someone mentioned Swift's satire which proposed the consumption of children).
He advocates rape outside of that post, not the legalisation of it, but committing the act itself. This is a quote from his site:
Quote:
|
"If you really believe the first no that she gives you in the bedroom, she will think of you either as a fool or a homosexual."
|
He also engages in victim blaming, advocacy for recording sexual encounters with women against their will, and other fun stuff.
Interestingly, he also takes the same stance against his critics that you do, relying on the term "social justice" often. Distancing yourself from him and claiming to be interested in the "integrity" of the conversation is interesting, but less so when you're just splitting hairs on WHEN he advocates rape and using the same tired broad-stroke "social justice" label to debase valid criticism.