So I've decided that I'm sick and tired of current-day feminists getting all in a huff when people invent anything to help women ward off
potential rapists - such as a nail polish that changes color in the presence of a drink spiked with a date rape drug - since it "puts responsibility on the woman"
instead of "preventing a goddamn rape."
Consent has become a trap for like-minded lunatics to use to trap men into choosing between raising little feminists and cucked faggots or prison time.
Here's their misstep though
> Men are expected to be solely responsible for any sexual encounter not being a rape
How does that help us? Keep reading
> With power comes responsibility
> With responsibility comes power
So here's my idea, the birth of a trend.
> We claim the responsibility they're trying to throw on us
> With exhuberance
> We deny any form of sexual encounter to any girl that might be drunk
Meet a girl in a bar thirty seconds after she walks in and she starts acting interested in you?
> No sex, she might have pregamed
Wedding night and your new wife had two glasses of wine to celebrate?
> No sex, she's drunk, she doesnt know what she wants
And even better, we market this decision for responsibility as a purely misogynistic one. We say that women aren't allowed to consent after drinking anything, advocate for laws requiring
breathalyzers for women if they appear drunk to see if they're above the legal limit to consent, letting men call 911 to get their would-be partner breathalyzed if
there's a chance she's been drinking, otherwise we're expected to be responsible beyond our knowledge. Extend the definition of "consent" for these laws
beyond the sexual one since women are not purely sexual objects, it would be sexist to only protect them from making poor sexual decisions.
If feminists are too big of pussies to have any power, we snatch it up.
> TLDR; We cuck feminists with their own insanity
>>73449303
Tldr
>I hate men
No foolin'
>>73449303
I like the way you think
>>73449303
>And even better, we market this decision for responsibility as a purely misogynistic one. We say that women aren't allowed to consent after drinking anything, advocate for laws requiring
>breathalyzers for women if they appear drunk to see if they're above the legal limit to consent, letting men call 911 to get their would-be partner breathalyzed if
>there's a chance she's been drinking, otherwise we're expected to be responsible beyond our knowledge. Extend the definition of "consent" for these laws
>beyond the sexual one since women are not purely sexual objects, it would be sexist to only protect them from making poor sexual decisions.
So reverse prohibition, essentially?
>>73449726
I mean it's the only way to rationally resolve what they're asking for, right? We as men can't afford to get tied-up in a situation where we thought a woman was sober enough to make a decision and then find out the next day that she was sooooo fucking hammered and that we brutally raped her
>>73449303
interesting idea anon. We'll need mass participation for it to work, though.
>>73450083
Well yeah, hence the "using a public forum." I mean obviously these laws would never be passed but it puts a quick check to the ethos those feminists. We don't even have to personally follow through on the philosophy, just publicize it.
>>73450043
Oh no, don't worry, I'm on board with promoting this concept.
The question is... where, and how? Twitter hashtags? Tumblrturfing? The misogynistic way works, but what about trolling through the feminist side of the fence?
If female feminist accounts started tweeting this idea and made are really compelling case for losing their own social freedoms under the guise of rape prevention, maybe actual idiots would fall in behind it.
I support this, but the nail polish was not a good example. There is nothibg wrong with it, actually it would be benificial. The nail polish makes a good prevention against potential drugging, that is it. Maybe if you said something like a vagina trap (the one with hooks inside it) then that would make more sense, because the woman could have trapped the man to technically mutilate himself.
>>73450479
See I considered trolling but there's a flaw
>Traitors in our midst
The argument loses the ethical appeal of appearing genuine.
We could still have fake feminists, but the main scope would be sexist shitlords embracing feminist ideals
>>73450896
I guess the sense of revulsion and confusion at feminist ideals being perverted and corrupted might be good for the lulz, bare minimum
>>73450978
I mean i definitely understand your initial idea but this statement is correct, we can get our devils advocate lulz and still make a difference if we lay low on the infiltration satire
>>73449303
Most 'rules' go out the window when there's pussy you want to fuck anon. It's biology, men are weak to it.
>Wedding night and your new wife had two glasses of wine to celebrate?
> No sex, she's drunk, she doesnt know what she wants
lol yea that will never happen
>>73451258
I acknowledge that, and we dont have to adhere to this in reality because bitches don't care about that, they care about tumblr and twitter posts. I'm saying we publicize those kinds of ideals
