So, once again the femikooks are all in a tither over what is or is not rape. I submit to you, a new term - "gray rape". Funny how I, an MRA/FRA have never heard of this term until a feminist mentioned it....

Supposedly, "gray rape" is like not 'real' rape, but rape none-the-less. Like when a guy and a girl start going at it and then she all of a sudden decides, for whatever reason, to withdraw consent. To me, this IS a gray area. If two people are already in the throws of intercourse, as in he has penetrated her, or in the supposed case below, oral sex has begun, and she wants it to stop, and he doesn't well... by definition, it is rape. But is certainly is a little gray wouldn't you say?

Read the alleged "rape" story:

The young woman calls what happened to her something akin to “gray rape,” a term she learned from an article in Cosmopolitan written by Washington Post journalist Laura Sessions Stepp. Hunter admits she initiated the encounter. But she eventually withdrew her consent, she says. “The whole thing was very confusing to me, and I didn’t know what to do about it for such a long time,” she says.

His mattress was on the floor pushed up against a wall, she says. “I’m sitting up against the wall on his mattress, and he’s standing over me,” she continues.

“It started happening, and then he, like, twisted his fingers around my hair and started pulling it and being just kind of violent. I started choking because he was just, like, pushing my head.… I started gagging and choking, and I couldn’t really breathe.”...She says she started pushing on Shaw-Fox’s abdomen to tell him to stop. “And he was like, ‘Yeah, that’s right, choke on it.’”

Now, I ain't no rocket scientist, but since when is giving a blow job called "it started to happen"? He is standing over her, she is performing oral sex on him. That much is very clear. So instead of stating that SHE was performing orally on him, the story teller (or the writer herself) chose to minimize her part in this "ordeal" by using cutsie worlds like "it started to happen"... Can't make "the victim" look like she was somehow responsible - at ANY level... right?

So if you femikooks have issues with terms like "gray rape", why is it that you have no issue with a woman sucking a cock and defining it as "it started happening"? What if HE used that term? "Your honor, I don't know what happened... I was standing over her with my cock out, and "it started happening". Uhuh... Thought so.

Getting back to the alleged "rape", he started acting like an ass by grabbing her hair & head (most women don't like that BTW pal) and shoving his penis deeper into her mouth. So far that she was having problems breathing. She got scared (understandably IMO) and tried to push him away...This is disgusting and pathetic, yes. But "rape"? Honestly, I am not sure.

Now, notice that the story doesn't go any further. Did "the deed" stop there? Did actual intercourse happen? Who knows. What we see is an example of an asshole, no doubt. But I would have a serious problem with trying this as a "rape" case. Especially if we find out that intercourse did actually happened AFTER the BJ. But I will err on the side of caution and assume that it went no further than this act.

So what do we have here then? We have an allegedly consenting adult woman blowing an allegedly adult male, he becomes crude and forceful and now he is a rapist? I think not. Again, an asshole? You betcha! But a rapist. No.

This IMO, IS an example of an asshole. And if there is such a thing as "gray rape" by definition, then this "COULD" be considered it; I am just not sure.

But let's go one step further just for the hell of it. Let's say that intercourse happened AFTER the blow job. Is this still rape? Is it a "gray rape"? Not at all in my opinion. Nothing more than a bad sexual experience... no more, no less.

Now let's look at a feminist's view on this:

"Rape can be confusing, it doesn't make it "gray." Feminists have long fought to dispel the myth that initially consenting to one form of intimacy does not make it okay for someone to force another kind on you. In this case, the young woman was hooking up with her eventual-attacker when he forced her to perform oral sex on him."

Notice? Anyone? Can you see the ever so slight twists and turns? Here, let me help you...

First we have this nice little example of redirection....

"...that initially consenting to one form of intimacy does not make it okay for someone to force another kind on you."

Notice the implication that he somehow did 'something else'. It's not just the BJ that happened according to this femikook. Or maybe it's that there IS IN FACT more to this story, but she chose to omit it... nawwwwwww... nice empowered, educated, and strong women don't do that sort of thing right?

Was she there? Does she know what this supposed "victim" consented to? I mean really! She is sucking his wee wee! Obviously she was at least consenting to that particular part of this so-called intimacy! DUH!

Follow me here....

The femi goes on to say;

"...In this case, the young woman was hooking up with her eventual-attacker..."

First, we have the typical knee-jerk conviction. "Eventual-attacker"... WTF is that shit? It was inevitable that he was going to "rape" her? Is that what she is implying? I guess so, since he does in fact have the patriarchy patented tool that is called the penis!

Then she goes even further in her redefinition of the supposed event(s). To whit;

"...when he forced her to perform oral sex on him."

Uhm.... "He forced her"? Is she reading the same thing I am? According to the alleged victim, "it started happening". Remember? There appears to be no actual responsibility on either party according to her account...

"It started happening"... You know, like rain and snow. A force of nature 'en all.

Pathetic. Feminists always appear to be right on top of these sort of things (pardon the pun) but in reality they are only on top of it long enough to redefine and redirect responsibility.

I would gather that if women like this femikook had their way, any and all actual ejaculation would be considered rape. Pull out and spooge on her? RAPIST! Spooge into the condom when she "is not ready"? RAPIST! Oh! And if you dare to spooge IN HER MOUTH when she said that she didn't want you to... that is the new and improved UBER RAPIST!

Ever wonder why men are getting more and more tired of this sort of crap? Constantly redefining terms and words to fit their dementia...er I mean ideologies... Constantly redirecting responsibility so that it is ALWAYS the man's fault... Think about it ladies.. and I use that label lightly, one plus one actually does equal two. Not sometimes three, or in a leap year, five.....

This is a clear case (based on the small amount of information given - intentionally I am sure) of a sexual encounter with a creep. Yes, I said it. He was a creep. He was so into his own personal pleasure that for some ungodly reason, he 'forgot' that if you clog the throat of someone, they just might have a problem breathing. He was so into what he was doing that he made crude comments (at least to her) like "Yea, that's right, choke on it!". Asshole? You-betcha!

But "rape" it is not.

...and there ain't no gray here either....

TMOTS

More...