In recent history, there have been a few widely circulated yet non-existent threats to western societies. Weapons of mass destruction was one of them. The “rape culture” called out by third wave feminists is only the latest one – although effortlessly demolished numerous times, statistic by statistic, through its sheer use, this fabrication persists, used in their rhetoric as  proven fact.

To combat this “crisis” (not to be mistaken with the assault on western women by people from radically different cultures), feminists propose broadening the definition of rape, as well as the obligation for people to obtain verbal consent from those they sleep with (not a Christian Grey style contract as well, I hope).

This makes no sense. To begin with, if there is a rape allegation denied by the person who is accused, there will still be one person’s word against the other’s. Either one can lie about having given or received verbal consent. It brings no revealing evidence whatsoever, unless, of course, it is recorded somewhere – which would mean little unless the act was actually videotaped, because someone can still give consent one minute and withdraw it the next. Or claim to have done so/ not have done so.


According to some feminists, even instances classed by default as consensual sex are actually rape. Leaving aside genuine concepts such as marital or statutory rape, these feminists measure the nature of the act by how “joyful and excited” those involved are, arguing that it shouldn’t take actual resistance for it to be considered non-consensual. Which is bat shit crazy, of course.

consent 1

Constantly worrying about picking up cues which are not even expressed can only make people insecure for no reason.There is no such thing as unintentional rape, or one the rapist doesn’t understand is happening. It’s an absurd concept.


In the convoluted minds of these feminists, instead of enjoying their time with women, men should constantly worry about the possibility that they’re actually raping them.

It’s time to rediscover the true meaning of consensual sex.

Consensual sex is when:

  • Both parties agree to have sex (ideally verbally but at least physically)
  • Both parties show excitement and willingness to have sex.

How to know it’s consensual:

  • Look for visual clues – Does the other person seem excited or happy? Are they smiling? Or do they seem scared or unsure?
  • Check body language – Is the other person seem to be in a positive mood or have high-energy? Or do they seem tense and uncomfortable?
  • See if they’re engaged in the sexual act – Is the other person proactively kissing or touching you? Or are they still and only move if you ask them to?

And lastly and most importantly,…

  • Just ASK and watch for if the answer is said with fear or joy. If it’s a “yes” said in a small or fearful voice, wait before progressing and find out what’s going on. It may be shyness or it may be fear – don’t you want to find out which one it is?


This article presumes there is some confusion in people’s minds regarding what consensual sex is and it should be a purpose in itself and not the natural state of things; the default interaction.

There is no need to go into details such as how shy a person seems at first or how much they end up liking it. What they clearly want is for men to become obsessed with the idea that they are exploiting women.


This concept of one-sided exploitation is made clearer by another article on the same website, regarding sex after consuming alcohol. This is actually hilarious through the sheer ridiculousness when trying to picture in real life:

The best rule is that if you or a partner have been drinking, make sure to check in regularly about any sex that you’re having.

Ask things like:

Do you still want to do this?

Imagine being right in the middle of it, and the partner suddenly asking that, for no apparent reason. I don’t suppose that happens to many people.

Is this okay?

I guess if it weren’t, the other person would just say so. Or, they would immediately assume you’re about to do something uncanny and they just haven’t noticed.

Do you need a break?

If that’s not objectification on the part of whoever wrote this, I don’t know what is. So this woman is some poor fragile object in danger of overuse, or some beast of burden being tired out. I know it’s sometimes called “riding”, but she’s not actually a horse.

Are you having fun?

As in rate me on a scale of one to ten…? Honestly…? Who asks that?

What do you want to do next?

And here comes a detailed description, I presume, straight out of a porn magazine, of what she “wants to do next”. The author may have listed this as a way to check for coherence.




The way these guidelines are formulated indicates the man and woman involved are having two separate experiences, totally disconnected at a mental and emotional level. Which is a really sad way to see things.

Furthermore, the article about alcohol consumption gives some indications which to me read like a cold, calculated guide to use someone’s body with enough legal precautions:

Ask yourself a few key questions like:

  • How much has the person drank since you last checked in?
  • Have they ever indicated that they wanted to have sex with you when sober?

Remember, though, that even if a person has said yes to sex when sober, and continues to say yes to sex after drinking, it’s still important to confirm this and to do regular check-ins to make sure that they’re still capable of consenting as more alcohol is consumed.

So imagine this guy, as the woman is enjoying his company, calculating her alcohol intake in order to make sure he’s safe enough. If anything, that has a predatory air to it, even with an emphasis on consent. Life isn’t like that; people bond and have a good time together; things evolve naturally.

Whereas rape is the aberration, not the norm, defining the norm with a clear focus on aberrations is nothing new to the SJW camp.