In this game you

 – Punch your boyfriend in the face if he looks at another girl

– Taze him if he drops clothes on the floor

– Hit him with a racket if he tries to change the channel

– Choke him with a leash if he drives to fast or tries to turn up the music volume.

The Boyfriend Trainer needs to not exist. Its sexist, abusive and sends the wrong message to everyone. Abuse is never ever okay, no matter who its directed at.

People have been complaining that feminists haven’t protested against this, and that this somehow means feminists condone violence against men.

Firstly, I’m not surprised that there hasn’t  been a huge wave of protest from anyone since this is just an online game. I wasn’t even aware of it till right now.

Secondly, I’m sure any feminist that does know of it finds it appalling. Feminism does not endorse violence against anyone. Thinking that it does is pretty ignorant.


29 year old fashion exec accused Officer Kenneth Moreno (44)  and Officer Franklin Mata (28) of raping her after an office party.

I was in shock. I couldn’t believe it was the cops.

–  the victim

The defense has been trying to discredit the woman’s memory because of her heavily intoxicated state the night of the rape.

She admitted she might not remember everything, but did not back down,

I think the memory I’ve held onto is the penetration. I woke up to being penetrated from behind. I woke up because the action of his penetration was so hard that my head was moving toward the window [at the head of her bed] like it was going to go through it.

(Reports the Daily News)

The defense also tried to discredit her story by bringing up the email she sent her roommate in which she downplayed the violence of the rape. She responded by saying

When something like this happens to you, the shock is so surreal that you just try to figure out what you need to do afterward. You tell people you’re OK, even though you’re not, just to get through it – and you want to get through it

– the victim

 NY Daily NewsHer wrenching testimony came as prosecutors released the transcript of a recording she secretly made for prosecutors when she confronted Moreno outside a police precinct. In it, Moreno admitted “it was only me” after she asked him repeatedly if they both raped her. She also got the cop to say, “Yes, yes I did,” when she asked if he wore a condom.

Moreno and Mata will face up to 25 years in prison if convicted.

Previous Post

Posted: April 16, 2011 in Social Commentary
Tags: ,

Do you know why I have never been raped? Because I refuse to speak to people who think exerting VIOLENCE UPON OTHERS IS EVER OKAY. Do you know why I will never be raped? BECAUSE I REFUSE TO GO ANYWHERE THAT WOULD PUT MYSELF IN THAT SORT OF DANGER, WHICH INCLUDES BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO, GOING TO PARTIES WHERE I MIGHT DRINK TOO MUCH IN THE PRESENCE OF PEOPLE I DON’T KNOW, WALKING THROUGH CITIES WITH HIGH CRIME RATES ALONE, OR AT NIGHT, OR AT ANY TIME THAT COULD PUT ME AT RISK, BEING IN ANY SORT OF RELATIONSHIP WITH ANYONE WHO IS SLIGHTLYIMMORAL, SPEAKING WITH ANYONE WHO TRIES TO LIMIT ANY OF MY FREEDOMS (which, by the way, aren’t granted by the government. The government doesn’t get to tell me what the fuck to do, either), OR JUST GENERALLY BE IN THE PRESENCE OF PEOPLE WHO ARE ANYTHING LESS THAN DESIRABLE, PLEASANT, MORAL, RATIONAL, OR LOGICAL. 

Endlos Auf Und Ab

I do know why you haven’t been raped, it’s because you’ve been lucky

(via STFU Rape Culture)

Men blaming women for being raped is disgusting. Women blaming women blaming women for being raped makes me want to puke.

Seriously, get off your high horse. Girls get raped by their fathers, their best friends, their brothers, their uncles, their fathers friends, their brother’s friends and so on.

Rapists don’t have a sign hanging off their necks saying “Rapist”. There are often “pleasant, desirable, rational” men.

I am a little sick of seeing these posts where people go around blaming society’s standards and expectations being the reason some people abuse others.

Endlos Auf Und Ab


I thought this was a great show that was trying to break the myths about rape and taking a stance against rape culture.

 But then the last two episodes I watched  had the victims lying about rape: one for money, the other in fear of her mother. 

After that I started questioning more of the show. Most of the rape victims were dead. Of the ones that have been alive, three were murderers, one a crazy mormon who forgave her rapist, two were liars. There are also too many flippant remarks about rape in prison.

I have a bitter taste in my mouth and don’t want to watch this show anymore.

 An appellant brief was filed last March in the Montana Supreme Court on behalf of Duane R. Belanus, who had been convicted of “of sexual intercourse without consent involving the infliction of bodily injury, aggravated kidnapping, burglary, tampering with or fabricating physical evidence, and misdemeanor theft” after beating and anally raping his then-girlfriend.

The brief starts by quoting convicted rapist, Mike Tyson’s character in the move “Hangover”

Don’t worry about it…like he said, we all do dumb shit when we’re fucked up.

The brief ends by quoting homophobic, antisemitic, racist misogynist Mel Gibson from after he was arrested for a DUI in 2006

Alcohol loosens your tongue, and makes you act, speak, and behave in a way that is not you

Luckily, Balanus was still convicted.

Posted: April 15, 2011 in Social Commentary

[Trigger Rape Culture]

Appropriate and necessary use of the word rape: To describe what has happened to someone who has been forced or coerced into a sex act.

Inappropriate and unnecessary use of the word rape: To describe what has “been done to you” by the IRS and/or US Government by requiring you to pay taxes.

– via Shakesville

According to Dante, a temporal monarchy is necessary to fulfill humanity’s purpose to actualize its intellectual potential. He asserts that one person must lead and only this individual can be just. This is because he would own all the territory and therefore have nothing to want and so would not compromise justice to acquire things for himself. Because he is completely just, the monarch would love everyone equally. He would not, however, regulate the day to day running of everyone’s lives. There would be, lords, city councils and village leaders under him to handle geographically specific laws.

Dante is wrong about the nature of monarchy because one person cannot have enough knowledge to rule, and no one is immune from want of immortality or personal bias.

A monarch would have to decide only the most controversial cases, however, these are the cases that require very specialized knowledge to understand and solve. Given Dante’s hierarchy of authority, only the most controversial cases that could not be resolved by local rulers would come to the monarch for judgment. For example, proponents of nuclear power say the risks are minimal and containable; opponents say there is no safe way of disposing nuclear waste and the contingency plans for power plant failures are not enough. To solve this conflict the monarch must have extensive knowledge of nuclear physics and power plant schemata. Another example of a controversy that requires specialized knowledge is the use of genetic engineering in agriculture. Genetically engineered crops have a higher yield than normal, do not need much fertilizer and increase bio-diversity. However, there are concerns about their effects on human health, the unknown consequences of gene flow into non GE crops and their effect on the balance of the ecosystem. The monarch needs to have considerable knowledge of genetic engineering and ecology to solve this controversy. There are also controversies regarding non-scientific issues, such as the virtue of company bail outs. Some argue bailing out companies would maintain economic stability and prevent unemployment. Others argue it would lead to inefficiency in the economy and lead to more long run unemployment.  The monarch would need in depth knowledge of economic theory and current economic trends to pick a side. The monarch could specialize in one field of study. However, it is not possible for the monarch to specialize in everything since the capacity of the human mind is not infinite and neither is the time the monarch has to learn. Therefore, the monarch would not have enough knowledge to solve major conflicts.

The monarch would not be completely free from want and would use resources for personal gain. Although the monarch would own all the territory in the world this would not diminish his mortality. In an attempt to avoid death he could have the best doctors cater only to

him, over-fund research for extending life, aging reversal, and cloning, and over-fund Churches in the hopes of ensuring a good after life. This would divert resources away from infrastructure development, education, and public health and safety, which would have benefited society as a whole. The fear of the after-life could also interfere with the monarch’s judgment. For example, he could let religious dogma guide his stance on abortion instead of science, women’s rights issues and the concrete consequences of making abortion illegal. Similarly he could align his view on homosexuality with that of the Church without consideration to human rights. Thus, the monarch would not be just because of his want of immortality.

In addition to being motivated by a greed for immortality, the monarch would be biased towards his friends. Owning all the territory would not free him from the need for friendship, which he is most likely to find among the kings since they are whom he would have the most in common with. Caring about his friends would make him sympathize with their views, which would affect his judgment. For example, if the kings were strongly against abortion and empowering women then the monarch would be more inclined to shut down Planned Parenthood. The monarch would also empathize with his friends’ wants, which would make him disposed towards fulfilling them. For example, if the kings wanted gold monuments built in their names then the monarch could divert resources from social development projects towards doing so. Therefore, the monarch would not be just because he would be influenced by the opinions and wishes of friends.

In conclusion, it is not possible to have one perfect ruler. Irrespective of material possessions, a monarch would have desires, personal biases and a limited knowledge set. A council of people would be better suited to rule the world since they could keep each other in check and have a diverse knowledge base.