At some point feminists (and other female supremacists) are going to develop new tactics to combat game. A commenter has said that ramping up the false rape industry is one possibility. Based on a couple of things I have recently come across, this looks like it could happen.
The first is related to the Duke Lacrosse case. A few months ago, Duke University revised their “sexual misconduct” policy. While the Duke Lacrosse case was one reason this was done, another was that the reported cases of “sexual misconduct” at Duke had declined slightly. Ada Gregory, director of the Women’s Center at Duke University, had an absurd explanation for this fact saying, “The higher IQ, the more manipulative they are, the more cunning they are … imagine the sex offenders we have here at Duke—cream of the crop.” In other words, because Duke has intelligent men attending, they can get away with rape (and other “sexual misconduct”) because they use their intelligence to convince the women they raped that they weren’t really raped at all. Effectively, Gregory is claiming that when it comes to intelligent men, most women won’t be able to determine that they were really raped because intelligent men can “trick” women into believing that they weren’t raped.
The new “sexual misconduct” policy also informs the Women’s Center at Duke of any “sexual misconduct” allegation and the Women’s Center is involved at every step of the process. The policy also contains language about how “real or perceived power differentials between individuals may create an unintentional atmosphere of coercion.” Effectively, Duke’s new policy claims that rape can’t be determined by the alleged victim, but by third parties (such as the ideologically driven “Women’s Center”).
What does this have to do with game? These ideas can be used to ramp up the false rape industry to combat game. One thing I have heard from some people is that a false rape charge can’t happen when you use game, because good enough game will protect you. While this is debatable (and I don’t think there is any guarantee of this), let’s assume it is true. The problem becomes that this is no longer about a man and a woman. As the Duke “sexual misconduct” policy says, third parties (which we can assume are anti-male) will get involved. This is the key, because instead of dealing with a single woman, you’re dealing with an entrenched feminist bureaucracy so feminists won’t have to worry about minor problems such as women believing they consented to sex. Feminists will claim that using game implies a certain level of intelligence that allows a man with game to convince a woman sex was consensual. This will lead feminists to claim that using game is rape. In addition, feminists can also claim that game creates a “real or perceived power differential” which means that a man with game raped a woman even though he had no intention to do so.
Recently, Obsidian wrote a post concerning Denise Romano and her views of game. This led to her spamming The Spearhead, Obsidian’s blog, Ferdinand’s blog, and others with a comment about rape. Spam is the correct word to describe what Denise Romano did since her comments had nothing to do with the issues being discussed, and in the case of Ferdinand’s blog her comment was added to a post about his blog’s comment policy, making it true spam in every sense of the word. What Denise Romano is most likely trying to do is imply that men with game are effectively rapists. While we all know that’s a crock, this is the beginning of using the false rape industry to combat game. We have nothing to worry about from Denise Romano since she is doing it so poorly, but other feminists in the future may do it better.