The Party of Rapists and Sexual Predators

Ireadforpleasure

Really Experienced
Joined
Aug 9, 2015
Posts
146
So, after the disturbing and extremely credible allegation that Brett Kavanaugh attempted to rape Christine Blasey Ford at a party when she was 15 years old, Republicans have come out of the woodwork, attempting to defend his behavior.

Everything from “boys will be boys” to “that was a long time ago” to “he was pig-drunk at the time” to “attempted rape isn’t actually a crime” has been offered up as a means of defending Kavanaugh’s sexual assault of a 15 year old girl.

It says a lot that so many Republicans are willing to defend Kavanaugh’s sexual assault against Christine Blasey Ford. The Republicans are so ready, willing and able to defend rapists, it’s almost like they’re the party of rapists and sexual predators.

Almost?

Last year, a Republican legislator from New Hampshire, named Robert Fisher was unmasked as an architect of an extremely misogynistic website where women are basically treated as the enemy of men, and it discusses strategies for fighting against women and against women’s rights.

In addition to being anti-woman, the website is also pro-rape. In one of the more infamous posts written by Fisher, he considered rape from the rapist’s perspective.

“I’m going to say it. Rape isn’t an absolute bad,” Fisher wrote, “Because the rapist I think probably likes it a lot. I think he’d say it’s quite good, really.”

And Robert Fisher isn’t alone. Republicans taking the side of the rapists seems to be pretty much the norm these days.

On 19 August 2012, U.S. Representative Todd Akin of Missouri, a Republican who was challenging incumbent Democrat Claire McCaskill for her seat in the U.S. Senate, was interviewed by St. Louis television station KTVI. During that interview, Akin was asked whether he believed abortion was justified in cases of rape, and he responded by asserting that “legitimate rapes” rarely resulted in pregnancy:

“It seems to be, first of all, from what I understand from doctors, it’s really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut the whole thing down.”

Two years later, while appearing in another television interview with MSNBC to promote his new book Firing Back, Akin asserted that “legitimate rape” was a law enforcement term and that his original remark had been “intentionally misunderstood”.

Funny thing is, there isn’t a law enforcement official anywhere in this country who is willing to back up Akin on his claim that “legitimate rape” is a law enforcement term. The phrase “legitimate rape” isn’t listed in any law enforcement document anywhere in this country. It’s like Akin just made the term up, in an attempt to malign women, and make them seem like they’re willing participants in sexual assaults.

And then we have Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association. Bryan Fischer is a radio host with millions of listeners. Republican candidates chronically seek Fischer’s endorsement as his radio show can influence millions of Republican votes. Fischer is very popular amongst Republican voters nowadays.

Fischer; of course; was a very strong supporter of Todd Akin and Todd Akin’s comments on rape.

“What Todd Akin is talking about”, Bryan Fischer said in public agreement with Todd Akin, “Is when you’ve got a real, genuine rape. A case of forcible rape, a case of assault, where a woman has been violated against her will through the use of physical force where it is physically traumatic for her, under those circumstances, the woman’s body — because of the trauma that has been inflicted on her — it may interfere with the normal function processes of her body that lead to conception and pregnancy.”

And then there’s Lawrence Lockman, a Republican member of the Maine House of Representatives, who asked, “If a woman has (the right to an abortion), why shouldn’t a man be free to use his superior strength to force himself on a woman?”

He even had the balls to refer to rape, as a man exercising his “pursuit of sexual freedom”.

Right-wing media figures like Fox News' Andrea Tantaros have a habit of attacking efforts to address sexual assault as proof of a "war" on men on boys, but many institutions actually favor alleged perpetrators when investigating the crimes.

And back in 2014, when the Obama White House released a report addressing campus sexual assault, the right-wing media rushed to try to discredit findings that one in five women experienced attempted or completed sexual assault while in college. In the time since the right-wing media have continuously questioned sexual assault statistics, with right-wing media figures like Rush Limbaugh going as far as to go on record about campus sexual assault to claim that "it's not happening" at all."

Andrea Tantaros of Fox news Channel seems to believe that frat boys who rape college girls have little choice in the matter and should not be blamed when they rape college girls. In defense of frat boys who rape college girls, Andrea Tantaros says, “These girls show up at these fraternity houses. The guys, what are they supposed to do? Lock them out? ‘Hey, how are you?’ They have a couple more beers, the girl passes out.”

What are they supposed to do?

How about NOT raping the girl? That’s the first answer that pops into my head. Apparently, the idea of NOT RAPING never occurred to Andrea Tantaros.

Andrea Tantaros also attacked MSNBC for daring to spend about an hour of broadcast time, covering the Senate military sexual assault hearings back in 2013, saying that saying “what they consider to be priorities” is “unbelievable.”

She also attacked President Barack Obama for speaking out against sexual assaults in the U.S. military, saying, “That same [Memorial Day] weekend, he talked about military rape. What a smack in the face of the men and the women have served us with dignity and gave the ultimate sacrifice. … I mean, it’s the way they prioritize these things. It’s unbelievable.”

The Pentagon estimates that 26,000 cases of sexual assault occurred in the military in 2012 alone, but apparently, tens of thousands of sexual assaults are nothing to be outraged about. What Tantaros thinks should inspire outrage is if we TALK about sexual assaults or attempt to DO SOMETHING about stopping them!!

Ann Coulter is just as bad, claiming that “there is no campus rape problem” and that unless a victim gets “hit on the head with a brick,” it isn’t a legitimate rape.

And then we have the current leader of the Republican Party on tape, bragging about how he can sexually assault women and get away with it, because he’s rich and famous. If he meets an attractive woman who’s married and not willing to have sex with him, that’s no problem. According to Donald Trump, he can just grab them by their genitals. There’s no guilt and no consequences. Trump indicates that he perpetrates sexual assaults like this all the time.

Defending rapists and maligning the victims of rape seems to be standard operating procedure for the Republican Party these days.
 
Funny thing, Tantaros filed suit against the Fox tabloid claiming sexual harassment as well as "inappropriate" comments being made by Bill O'Reilly, Dean Cain, and Scott Brown.

What are men supposed to do when a woman shows up in a skirt and heels? Weren't there more important things she should have focused on?
 
"We've the obvious open schoolboy rape,
With little mandolins and perhaps a cape."
 
I used to manage a bar, did security. I used to laugh when females in cock dresses, searching for cock, would complain about getting goosed.

This one, and I gave seen a billion just like her, figured out at 14 she has a pussy......letting boys play means you aren't lonely on a Saturday night. For a #7 at 2:30.........just another plain Jane butterface.

A few if them around here, I see!

LoL, that same lady, sits in the same stands at the speedway every year, same black cocktail dress, hoping someone will notice.

Hope is a beautiful thing. However, hope doesn't buy dick on Saturday night.

This communist shrew has no credibility. Her Feminazi enablers have accomplished what?
 
This communist shrew has no credibility. Her Feminazi enablers have accomplished what?

Communist? Where have you gleaned that gem from and is it permissible to rape a Communist without fear of retribution?

If she were a Communist, why would the Nazis be enabling her?
 
Who had the very first treaty with Hitler. Careful, now, it's a trick question they don't teach communists in the history books!

What's is the difference between socialists and communists? Besides 100m dead, a 4term president and a NYC PR firm.

Next up......"Socialists are Right Wing"
 
Who had the very first treaty with Hitler. Careful, now, it's a trick question they don't teach communists in the history books!

What's is the difference between socialists and communists? Besides 100m dead, a 4term president and a NYC PR firm.

Next up......"Socialists are Right Wing"

I am familiar with the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, a secret arrangement to carve up Poland that Hitler later reneged on (possibly the biggest of all his critical errors that led to Germany losing the war).

I am curious as to how that pact would make it OK to rape a Communist.
 
Who had the very first treaty with Hitler. Careful, now, it's a trick question they don't teach communists in the history books!

What's is the difference between socialists and communists? Besides 100m dead, a 4term president and a NYC PR firm.

Next up......"Socialists are Right Wing"

I would say the first pact with Hitler was The Anti-Comintern Pact: https://www.britannica.com/event/Anti-Comintern-Pact

ETA: The Molotov Pact was signed almost tree years later:https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/german-soviet-nonaggression-pact
 
Last edited:
Sadly, we have come to a point in this nation where one political party believes that rapists should be held accountable for their crimes, and the other political party believes that WOMEN WHO SPEAK OUT about being raped should be punished for speaking out!
 
so, let's just suppose that a republican senator's 14 year old daughter was sexually assaulted by a 17 year old boy. would he just shrug it off as "boys will be boys"? and what's the time limit on reporting it? if he didn't find out for a year, does that mean it should be ignored? 2 years? 5 years?
 
so, let's just suppose that a republican senator's 14 year old daughter was sexually assaulted by a 17 year old boy. would he just shrug it off as "boys will be boys"? and what's the time limit on reporting it? if he didn't find out for a year, does that mean it should be ignored? 2 years? 5 years?
Shotgun wedding first, then partnership in the family business.
 
To get back to the OP, I consider Dems and Reps to be about equal in terms of sexual depredations, including forcible and statutory rape and sexual harassment (Hello, Paula Jones) and other illegal acts. It is a bipartisan practice.
 
so, let's just suppose that a republican senator's 14 year old daughter was sexually assaulted by a 17 year old boy. would he just shrug it off as "boys will be boys"? and what's the time limit on reporting it? if he didn't find out for a year, does that mean it should be ignored? 2 years? 5 years?

I'm certain an actual sexual assault would not be shrugged off by anyone, and that would have nothing to do with the age of the people involved. If the sex were consensual, the senator would be pissed off at the boy, because his daughter is so much younger. If his 17 year old daughter had sex with her 17 year-old boy friend, the senator probably would shrug it off, although he would most likely not be happy about it.

The time limit for reporting an illegal act would vary from one state to another.
 
I'm certain an actual sexual assault would not be shrugged off by anyone, and that would have nothing to do with the age of the people involved. If the sex were consensual, the senator would be pissed off at the boy, because his daughter is so much younger. If his 17 year old daughter had sex with her 17 year-old boy friend, the senator probably would shrug it off, although he would most likely not be happy about it.

The time limit for reporting an illegal act would vary from one state to another.


i'm talking about the daughter reporting it to her father. how long before she can't be believed? you'll notice that we're talking about assault....how can that be consensual? you're not answering the questions posed.
 
i'm talking about the daughter reporting it to her father. how long before she can't be believed? you'll notice that we're talking about assault....how can that be consensual? you're not answering the questions posed.

If the assault were reported immediately, the daughter would probably be believed with little or no question. If it were reported over thirty years later, she would be doubted, probably extremely so.

Some people would consider sex with a girl that young to be assault, even if she agreed to it. That would be referred to as statutory rape.
 
So, after the disturbing and extremely credible allegation that Brett Kavanaugh attempted to rape Christine Blasey Ford at a party when she was 15 years old, Republicans have come out of the woodwork, attempting to defend his behavior.

Are you fucking stupid? Her own friends, who she claimed were there and saw it, can't corroborate her story. Others who were supposedly there say her description of his behavior is wrong. SHE HERSELF says she doesn't remember what happened. And you say "extremely credible"?

She is a staunch and VERY vocal activist against Trump and his supporters and has been doing her own part to disrupt his administration. She is a paid shill for the DNC.

She also has her own personal axe to grind with the Cavanaugh family. It was Cavanaugh's Mother who presided over the foreclosure proceedings against Fords Parents and ruled against them.

She is a lying bitch assisting the DNC in delaying, once again, the appointment of a supreme court justice. When "Disrupt, Delay, Derail, Divert, Discredit" fails, fall back on "Defame".

And now that Ford's credibility is going down the shitter they are trying to bring in another with equally unfounded claims. This Liberal ploy has been over used and is getting old.

The entire party is losing its credibility and their own members are seeing them for what they are and LEAVING. They are putting as much distance as they can between themselves and the DNC because they KNOW that the shit is about to hit the fan.

Attempting to overthrow the government by subversion is an act of TREASON. And that is what the Dems are doing. Disrupting the entire government in order to try and get power for themselves. And if you think no one is seeing it, then you are just as dumb as the rest of them and you can hang right alongside them.
 
Are you fucking stupid? Her own friends, who she claimed were there and saw it, can't corroborate her story. Others who were supposedly there say her description of his behavior is wrong. SHE HERSELF says she doesn't remember what happened. And you say "extremely credible"?

She is a staunch and VERY vocal activist against Trump and his supporters and has been doing her own part to disrupt his administration. She is a paid shill for the DNC.

She also has her own personal axe to grind with the Cavanaugh family. It was Cavanaugh's Mother who presided over the foreclosure proceedings against Fords Parents and ruled against them.

She is a lying bitch assisting the DNC in delaying, once again, the appointment of a supreme court justice. When "Disrupt, Delay, Derail, Divert, Discredit" fails, fall back on "Defame".

And now that Ford's credibility is going down the shitter they are trying to bring in another with equally unfounded claims. This Liberal ploy has been over used and is getting old.

The entire party is losing its credibility and their own members are seeing them for what they are and LEAVING. They are putting as much distance as they can between themselves and the DNC because they KNOW that the shit is about to hit the fan.

Attempting to overthrow the government by subversion is an act of TREASON. And that is what the Dems are doing. Disrupting the entire government in order to try and get power for themselves. And if you think no one is seeing it, then you are just as dumb as the rest of them and you can hang right alongside them.

Ford has also claimed there was another person involved - a teenager named Judge. She is saying that Judge rescued her from K., but he has no recollection of the incident either. That leads me to believe that Ford is wrong, either lying for her own reason or imagining everything. K. could be lying to cover his own ass, but Judge would have no reason for lying, and I can't believe he would have forgotten about the incident if it had been an attempted rape.

This is not absolute proof, but I would tend to believe K. rather than Ford.
 
Last edited:
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizzard426 View Post
Who had the very first treaty with Hitler.

My guess would be the 1938 Munich Agreement between Germany and Czechoslovakia. It was signed by Germany, France, the U.K., and Italy...interestingly enough the USSR didn't sign that one...the USSR did sign a treaty of Mutual Assistance in 1935 with...France.

It's so easy to fucking own racist righties when they don't know history at all.

Take a look at my Post #10, and maybe you will learn some history. Interestingly, I cited the same source as you did in your post.
 
Back
Top