The girl who cried "rape"

Surprise Buttsecks: Lying Mattress Girl Edition
Looks like Emma Sulkowicz's experience with her surprise back-door caller wasn't quite so surprising- and she wasn't quite as broken up about it as she would like us to believe:
Emma Sulkowicz, the Columbia University senior who has become a national icon for women by carrying a mattress wherever she goes to remind the public of her claim that she was sexually assaulted by fellow student Paul Nungesser, reportedly sent romantic Facebook messages to Nungesser after the alleged assault, including, “I love you.” 
Nungesser, who has been threatened and harassed as a result of Sulkowicz’s allegations, has always protested his innocence, despite a media frenzy that made him a pariah in the college community. Sulkowicz, on the other hand, has been feted by the New York City chapter of the National Organization for Women, the Feminist Majority Foundation, and invited to the State of the Union Address by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand. 
The story began in the students’ freshman year, according to Nungesser, who says they met as leaders in the Columbia Outdoor Orientation Program (COÖP), a freshman pre-orientation experience. Both joined Alpha Delta Phi (ADP), a coed fraternity; by the end of their freshman year, he stated, “we were beginning to develop a very close friendship; it was an intimate friendship where we would hug each other and so on, but always platonic.” Nungesser says he occasionally slept over in Sulkowicz’s room during their freshman year, eventually leading to a sexual encounter at the end of the year. 
Nungesser professes, “The next morning, we had a talk about it and we both felt that it was not really a good idea,” but four or five weeks later, it happened again, with another talk afterward, and they separated for the summer, during which they chatted intimately on Facebook. 
Then, just before school started again, on August 27, 2012, they met at a party for COÖP leaders. Nungesser says Sulkowicz invited him to her room; both agree the encounter started with consensual sex, but Sulkowicz states that Nungesser turned violent, choking and hitting her, then finally anally raping her before leaving. Nungesser, on the other hand, asserts that the anal intercourse was mutually agreed upon, leading to other sexual activity, after which they fell asleep. He says he left the next morning while she was still sleeping. 
Sulkowicz says she filed a complaint within the university system several months later, after being informed of other supposed sexual assaults Nunbgesser committed. Nungesser was later exonerated of all charges.
Roosh put it very well shortly after Ms. Sulkowicz took her sob story public:


We now have pretty much incontrovertible proof that she is in fact a liar- and a really terrible one, at that. Her lies were so transparent that even Columbia University's own campus security didn't believe her. Given how liberal that university's administration is (I would know), that is saying something.

It gets worse, however. This young woman juvenile delinquent isn't just a liar. She is an active threat to the people around her and should be prevented from ever holding a position of any kind of responsibility until such time as she proves that she can be trusted. Given her history, this may never happen.

I do not make this claim lightly. Consider the massive body of evidence that we now have stacked against Ms. Sulkowicz's absurd claims. It all points to a woman who is either so damaged as to be incapable of acting responsibly on her own, or an outright deranged sociopath. In either case, she is an an actual danger to others.

She and the man that she alleges "raped" her were friends before the alleged incident ever took place. (There is a whole other story to be told here about the dangers of the friendzone, but we'll leave that alone for now.) She and her "rapist" engaged in casual sex at least twice, probably more, before she claimed she was raped. She and her paramour then had sex again, this time through, er, shall we say, non-standard methods of entry, and that is when everything fell apart.

I can only guess at Ms. Sulkowicz's motives- though it is clear that they were assuredly malign, judging by the results of her public claims. As part of that guesswork, I can posit that she simply didn't enjoy the experience of, um, getting pegged, because she found the act shameful or distasteful after the fact for some unknown reason.

Instead of dealing with it and moving on- since it is becoming ever more evident that the act was done based on mutual consent- she decided to cry "rape". Maybe she didn't know that she was potentially destroying an innocent man's life, maybe she did.

The former case is utterly implausible. Incoming freshmen at Columbia University are given long finger-wagging lectures about sex and the importance of consent, and women in particular are given numerous resources to help them deal with sexual abuse on campus. The boys are told in no uncertain terms that any violation of the rules surrounding sexual conduct will be punished in the harshest possible manner.

This leaves the latter as a virtually inescapable conclusion. And if a young woman like that is willing to attempt to actively destroy a young man's life like that, then she isn't just a liar and an attention-seeker. She is a criminal and must be treated as such- as a danger to herself and those around her.

There can be no question that her actions have been wantonly destructive, for they framed an innocent man who has since been judged innocent of every charge of which he stood accused. A young man's life is destroyed. No matter how hard Mr. Nungesser works, he will never be able to shake the stigma of being outed as a possible suspect in a campus rape case- never mind that he is innocent of all charges. His reputation is gone, just like that. It will take him years, maybe decades, to rebuild it.

And all because of the wanton stupidity, if not outright sociopathy, of an arts major at one of the most ridiculously overrated and blindly liberal universities in the world.

However, Ms. Sulkowicz's actions are far worse than that.

In lying about her supposed "anal rape", she has managed to trivialise the reality of actual rape.

Let no one be mistaken about this: true rape is not to be tolerated, not now and not ever. Forceful penetrative sex without consent is an abomination. (I will leave the actual question about where that line of consent lies to another discussion; as red-pill types know all too well, "no" doesn't always mean "no".)

It is an exercise in literally naked coercive force. It is a method of control- a highly effective one, actually- that dehumanises the victims and destroys their sense of self-respect and dignity. It has rightly been condemned by civilisations throughout history as an unconscionable act and a deadly sin.

However, bearing false witness against an innocent person is also a deadly sin. And there can now be no question that this is precisely what Ms. Sulkowicz has done.

In any moral society, such a woman would be cast out for her crimes. Unfortunately, we no longer live in a moral society. And so a fool and a trollop who was stupid enough to condemn an innocent man has also condemned future true rape victims to a fate where their word is taken far less seriously, where their abusers are less likely to be brought to justice.

If this is how feminism is supposed to work, I'd say that feminists just scored an epic own goal.

Could incentives cause your team to score own goals?
... Oooooops


Popular Posts