Probably the most ironic thing about feminism is its own success. That is, if the patriarchy was as fearful and oppressive and all-powerful as many feminists make it out to be (even to the point of infantilizing women), then how could feminism been so successful? I understand that in the minds of the cultlike feminists, no success is ever enough, and they must remain in a perpetual state of starvation and war, but really. Does no-one celebrate the successes of feminism, and so, admit that to some extent, the patriarchy (the Enemy), has been driven back, attenuated, and somehow reduced in power? Like all other totalitarian movements, feminism has an existential problem with truth. The 1 out of every 4 rape statistic has been thoroughly disproven, and campus rape statistics have been debunked as well, but an unexplored facet of all this is: does rape actually enforce or strengthen the patriarchy? Feminists should talk to men about this issue.
Do men feel that rape helps them achieve personal dominance? Do they regard it as a valid expression of sexuality or force? Do they find it enthralling or justifiable? That’s the thing — very few men would agree to any of that. Rape is classified as a crime, and it used to be punished by death. So, how can feminists claim that rape strengthens the patriarchy, when men overwhelmingly disapprove of it, and did so to the extent that they made it a crime that killed the perpetrator? Shouldn’t they have held out the rapist as a model citizen, or as a hero? I’m not aware of a single instance in Western civilization where a man was lauded as a hero because he raped.
There is no agreement among men to celebrate rapists; rape endorsement is not part of the bro code. All the feminists are left with is saying that women are held to be so valuable that despoiling them must result in the perpetrator being killed. Of course, that argues for a high valuation of women, so oops. Thus the horn of a dilemma — either women are valued by society or they are chattel. They cannot be both. If men endorsed and winked at rape, then laws against rape would not exist, and rapists would not be jailed or killed. Additionally, rape victims are traumatized, so more rapes would result in fewer women willing to have sex, so how would that would be something that any man would want, especially the players that feminists think all men are?
Rape only exists as a means of control in a society that abhors female beauty. Such a society is an Islamic society, as Islam seeks to cover up women’s bodies at every possible opportunity. Islamic society devalues women as people, as citizens, and seals off opportunities for freedom or even economic improvement. Needless to say, in Islamic nations, rape is viewed as something that merely happens, and is the fault of the rape victim; the man is not to blame.
Note that feminists have nothing to say about Islamic countries; that is because either they are too fearful of its patriarchy (and its violent men), or they are so insular that they understand at some unspoken level, that feminism could never bloom in a culture that was not at first free, and second, respected women.