If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.
–mindless wingnut bumper sticker cliche that the left can’t refute
Way back in my very first post, I described how the lack of attractive females spending time at my college fraternity should have gotten me to swallow the Red Pill. We were really good guys, but the hotties spent all their time at the houses that were continually on probation for facilitating date rape.
But a couple of years before I got there (and I’ve seen the pictures to prove it), things weren’t nearly as bad. Yes, we had betas, but we also had a decent share of Alphas. It was one of the biggest houses on campus, featured a wide range of men, and had a fair amount of attractive women spending time there.
But the the university decided to crack down on rush (the process by which fraternities recruit new members, for those of you who don’t know). It was postponed until after Christmas, and no freshmen were to be allowed on the premises of any fraternity before that. Serving alcohol to freshmen could result in punishment.
The leadership of our house determined that it would prioritize having a clean rush. We wouldn’t allow freshmen to visit us in the fall. We would not get in trouble!
So our membership plummetted. The size of our house dropped by over 50% over the course of three years. By the time legitimate rush came around, every guy that any house actually wanted had already secretly agreed to join houses that got them wasted every weekend up until then. Not only did they allow them inside, they served them alcohol.
(Purely by coincidence, less than two years after the university cracked down on fraternal alcohol consumption, people in fraternities started dying: falling or jumping out of windows, doing push-ups in the street and getting hit by cars, etc.)
And this is why the naivety of the leftist Feminine Imperative will drive us to ruin.
Conservatives and libertarians understand my opening quote so thoroughly we don’t even use it any more. Rules are all fine and dandy, but people will to break them.
However, we need to understand that the same principle applies in other areas.
For example, the founder of Home Depot has claimed the he couldn’t start a business today because of all the rules and regulations. In essence, it’s almost illegal to be a successful entrepreneur in America today.
But people do get rich. They skirt tax laws or get waivers. They hire illegal laborers and ignore OSHA as much as possible. Full-time workers have their wages reduced to dodge Obamacare.
If running a successful business is outlawed, only outlaws will run successful businesses.
And others just decide to open a crack house.
On college campuses, men accused of rape are routinely denied due process and held to a lower threshold of guilt. “In campus hearings, legal terms like ‘guilt,’ ‘innocence’ and ‘burdens of proof’ are not applicable, but [Occidental] College never assumes a student is in violation of college policy.” Accusers can testify over Skype. Accused students can have an “advocate” to help them through the process, but they can’t be a lawyer, and they can’t speak during the hearing. And “yes” might mean “no”:
A male Occidental student could obtain verbal (or even, it seems, written) consent from a female Occidental student before commencing sexual intercourse. But that male student could still be found guilty of sexual assault if an Occidental tribunal found–with a 50.01% degree of certainty–that in this instance, “yes” did not mean “yes.”
I’m not saying that there isn’t legitimate rape (because there is), but how could any male possibly be protected from some babe changing her mind the next morning? She’s completely absolved of any responsibility.
So decent guys, the shy guys, the ones who don’t want to ruin their futures are going to back off at the first hint of resistance. This is not how books like Fifty Shades of Grey begin. The only guys who will get the girls are the ones who don’t give a shit.
If all sex is potentially rape, only potential rapists will have sex.
For a climax (not the sexual kind), the Departments of “Justice” and “Education” have teamed up to prevent all women on every campus from ever experiencing any type of discomfort whatsoever (bold emphasis mine, italics not):
The letter states that “sexual harassment should be more broadly defined as ‘any unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature’” including “verbal conduct” (that is, speech). It then explicitly states that allegedly harassing expression need not even be offensive to an “objectively reasonable person of the same gender in the same situation”—if the listener takes offense to sexually related speech for any reason, no matter how irrationally or unreasonably, the speaker may be punished.
Among the forms of expression now punishable on America’s campuses by order of the federal government are:
- Any expression related to sexual topics that offends any person. This leaves a wide range of expressive activity—a campus performance of “The Vagina Monologues,” a presentation on safe sex practices, a debate about sexual morality, a discussion of gay marriage, or a classroom lecture on Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita—subject to discipline.
- Any sexually themed joke overheard by any person who finds that joke offensive for any reason.
- Any request for dates or any flirtation that is not welcomed by the recipient of such a request or flirtation.
“Any request for dates or any flirtation that is not welcomed by the recipient of such a request or flirtation.”
And lefties say we’re fascists?
How the hell is any guy going to know if his “request for dates” are unwelcome before making them?
Who is going to have all the power on our campuses?
Queen Hamster, that’s who.
Like Jacobson says:
There is likely no student on any campus anywhere who is not guilty of at least one of these “offenses.” Any attempt to enforce this rule evenhandedly and comprehensively will be impossible….
Correct, but these rules will be enforced subjectively and sporadically. A guy awkwardly asking a girl out for coffee can be punished, or not, depending on the girl’s mood.
Alphas won’t be affected as much (who’s going to prosecute Christian Grey?), but betas will be crushed. The only way for a man to establish a level of comfort with attractive women is to spend time around them, to approach them and face potential rejection. Getting rejected is tough enough, but if that little brunette has the power to put you before a disciplinary board if you neg too hard (or too soft), it’s going to make it even tougher. Guys who need practice with women (even some who’ve swallowed the Red Pill) will get less of it, leaving the pool of sexually attractive males even smaller than it already is.
So not unlike gun laws that help criminals and business regulations that favor the well-connected and unethical, these new rules which are intended to keep anybody from getting offended will primarily result in the further castration of inoffensive males.
And that lacrosse player who bangs two new chicks every weekend won’t change his behavior in the slightest.
Lefties often assume that a well-intended rule will have beneficial results; they’re oblivious to the Law of Unintended Consequences. Nevertheless, when rules, laws, and regulations get out of hand, they won’t do what they’re intended to do. They can’t even mean what they originally meant.
Instead, we’re left with subjective enforcement, cronyism, and an oppressive environment in which men are trained to avoid risk. The powerful become more powerful, for the potential costs of opposing that power become too great.
The only possible result of a world with too many rules is one without any at all. To civilize us too much is to call on the barbarian within. Oppression. Castration. Decline.
On the other hand, imagine the opportunities for an aspiring Black Knight!