OK, so being male means you are inherently violent and that needs to be quashed. Got it.
So, play this out with me here: I'd never wish for it to happen, but let's just say that some criminal out there decides he's desperate enough to attempt to rape one of these pseudo-feminine SJ warriors, and one of us hypermasculine boors decides to draw down and put the rapist on the ground to wait for the cops.
Should we have just gone up and offered to have him rape us instead? Is that how that narrative goes? Or would she prefer we call all of our female friends and apologize for our very existence disturbing them, but suggest a meeting the following Wednesday or other day of her/their choosing to discuss the horrible act that another male perpetrated on their sister-female?
I have a different answer. Prone out the rapist, call the cops, and then when she b***hes about it, tell her to go f herself instead. At least that would be done with consent.
The initiation of violence is rarely if ever a good thing. The response to initiated violence being at least equally, if not of superior violence, is rarely if ever a bad thing. (Credit to Mr. Goldwater, who famously said it as: "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.")
Blessings,
Bill
