Comments on: Feminists Gone Wild

By: lulz

lulz — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 19:54:45 +0000

I don't think anyone knocks the Carolina Review writers for being Christian, pro-abstinence, and being against casual, extramarital sex. I wouldn't care if they were those things or atheists having orgies with each other every night. The problem is when they feel that the rest of the population to abide by their standards. One of the later articles on this blog for example (by the same author as this one) proposes that information about sex on the CHS website be taken down. Because the Carolina Review doesn't want to have pre-marital sex. Yet that information is helpful to other UNC students and individuals that do not want to abide by YOUR (meaning the Carolina Review staff) personal rules. No one is forcing all the abstinent students to read the webpage, it's just there for the people that want it, yet you STILL felt it shouldn't be there.

That's what people are arguing against. Trust me, none of us liberals (or anyone) really care whether you're going to be a virgin forever or banging 10 dudes/girls a night. It's just when you try to force US, the non-Carolina Review staff, to live our lives the way you all want to live yours, is when it becomes a problem.

By: Chelsea W.

Chelsea W. — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 15:55:25 +0000

Good post, Justin! Anyone who thinks Justin is trying to say that he is not against rape or that he "doesn't want to confront" the issue of rape obviously doesn't know him and didn't read his post carefully. He's just trying to say that when you start accepting the idea that no one (not even God) can say what is right and what is wrong, you can't condemn rapists because the justifications against rape are ultimately based in a system of morality that is rigid, universally applicable, and originates from God.

@Riley, I'm pretty sure that most of the guys on the Review do think that women are (intellectually) equal to men. Just defending their honor.

By: Riley Matheson

Riley Matheson — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 06:52:23 +0000

C'mon, dmatthews. You know you laughed.

"What does this express about your beliefs concerning the ways women communicate?"

Stop being so sensitive, Freud. You know, normally I refrain from getting involved in debates about sexual issues, but I can't help it this time. All you liberals bitch and moan about the Carolina Review writers for being Christian, pro-abstinence, and being against casual, extramarital sex. But you know–these guys are not the douche bags that these UNC feminists probably hook up with every Thursday night. These guys honestly do respect women, that much I think is obvious. Now granted, they may not think that women are equal to men (I don't want to speak for them), and therefore they may not meet your feminist standards, but still, give them some credit and stop thinking with your penis.

And Hilary, you're really fighting the wrong enemy here. Justin is clearly not offended by the images because he doesn't want the issue of rape to be addressed. Like most guys, I'm sure Justin hasn't raped anyone, and therefore doesn't need to do any soul-searching. If anything, he'd defend you against a rapist at his own expense (now that you've stereotyped that women are more likely to get raped by a man, I'll stereotype that men are more likely to defend nobly a woman than vice versa). In my own male opinion, modern feminists are almost captivated by the idea of rape. They can't seem to talk about it enough (to "raise awareness," no doubt), but they really don't seem to want to do anything to prevent it. I've never heard them advocate the death penalty for rapists. Any conservatives (i.e., non-feminists) out there who would be opposed to that policy?

By: jaiby

jaiby — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 06:48:37 +0000

"oh look at me, look at me..do I have the most wittier comment?!?" Please…spare us your power trip anakin.

By: adent

adent — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 05:59:18 +0000

Oh my goodness! He made the recognition that, on average, women have higher-pitched voices than men! Heavens forfend, we must rid society of suck ilk. How dare he recognize facts and have the audacity to actually relay them publicly!

By: dmatthews

dmatthews — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 05:02:53 +0000

Riley, are you aware that you used a misygonostialls slur in order to establish your dominance over Hillary?

By: dmatthews

dmatthews — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 04:54:19 +0000

Riley, are you aware that you used a misygonostialls slur in order to establish your dominance over Hillary?

Pay close attention to the phrase "high-pitched, banshee screams". What does this express about your beliefs concerning the ways women communicate?

By: adent

adent — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 23:53:16 +0000

No, that's completely valid. Please define this "general consensus" please. Is unanimity required? Obviously there isn't a consensus because rapes still occur. Maybe only 50% plus 1 is required to same whether some is moral or immoral? At the end of the day, moral relativists can only say they accept certain assumptions, nothing is right or wrong outside of those assumptions, so is someone adheres to different assumptions, moral relativists can say nothing but "I believe rape is wrong." They cannot say, "Rape is wrong" because that would be an absolutist statement and they do have zero philosophical foundations to stand on for making such a statement.

By: adent

adent — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 23:50:04 +0000

Oh man, I haven't heard an insult like that since kindergarten! You're so witty __o_!

By: ___0_

___0_ — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 22:34:58 +0000

"You guys, on the other hand, have no basis for saying rape is wrong other than "General consensus" or whatever other silly premise you throw out."

This is not a serious argument, you sound like a 14 year old who's just discovered rudimentary logic. Only people who believe in fairy tales are allowed to condemn rape? Ninja please.