In an article for Fusion, feminist writer Lux Alptraum recalls her harrowing tales of sexual escapades, revealing how time after excruciating time, her encounters with men left her feeling violated and, despite having consented to the encounter, considering her subsequent regret over consenting a valid reason to put her male partners in the same moral – though admittedly not legal – category as rapists. From a boyfriend who “insinuated” he would break up with her if she didn’t sleep with him, to a date who drove from afar and “expected” sex as his reward for doing so, Alptraum repeatedly found herself wilfully participating in sexual encounters which she ended up regretting.
But rather than trying, through introspection, to understand why she makes the choices she makes, and/or why she later regrets them, Alptraum found the perfect scapegoats for her “traumatic and damaging sexual experiences”: the men with whom she slept.
In her article, Alptraum fully acknowledges that none of these encounters come anywhere near meeting the legal definition of rape. And yet, she somehow contends that the men, through “small acts of boundary-pushing and coercion”, are at fault.
Leaving aside her blatantly dishonest use of the word “coercion” in this context (since an act of sexual coercion is, by definition, rape, or at the very least sexual assault, and is certainly always criminal), and her intentional use of the highly ambiguous concept of “boundary-pushing”, Alptraum’s entire piece is an exercise in the now all-too-familiar attempt by feminists to portray all men as rapists. When a man has sex with a woman against her will, that is obviously rape. But when a man has sex with a woman who, as far as he knows (because this is what she chooses to convey to him), is as willing a participant in the act as he is, he may, unwittingly, be committing what Alptraum calls a “sexual microaggression”.
This is the feminist version of original sin: all men are sinners, and their sin is that they’re men. Whether they’re paying a woman a compliment, buying her a drink, or showing affection in a physical manner, if a man is trying to get a woman to have sex with him, he is encouraging her to make a choice she may later regret.
While claiming to advocate gender equality, feminists keep portraying women as intellectually inferior to men. A woman, by their logic, is incapable of knowing whether or not she’s making the right decision. A man, on the other hand, should not only know what’s best for him, but should also be more aware of his female sexual partner’s emotional process than she is.
I do not consider women inferior. Therefore, I am not a feminist. Despite feminists’ implications to the contrary, women are volitional beings, just like men, with the capacity to be rational (and, as Alptraum proves, irrational). And just as a woman is not at fault if a man regrets having sex with her, men should not be considered villains because some women change their mind after the act.
Libertarian Home 
Razi did not provide an image for this post so I used a still from this popular anti-racist video. As far as I can tell, the still depicts both a racist and sexual micro-aggression simultaneously.
Using the definitions implicit in Lux Alptraum’s article and accepting the definition of a racist micro-aggression implicit in the video, then this is a full & consistent narrative of the content:
A woman is in an elevator. A black man walks in. She attacks him savagely. Taking this savage attack philosophically he first fantasises about raping her, then escalates to raping her in a more shocking manner, then continues to fantasise about raping her while she savagely attacks him some more.
Now go and watch the video and see how badly at variance with objectivity the discourse is becoming – and consider how negative and fearful a “socially just” world must feel if these intellectuals cannot distinguish between rape, savagery and saying “boo”.
This stuff parodies itself.
PS nothing in the above should be taken to mean that Lux Alptraum’s boyfriends were not jerks. That they are jerks is the one accurate thing she didn’t actually say.
LikeLike
Deeply alarming. This Frankfurt School stuff may have started as a trick (a stick to beat “capitalism” with), but it is clear that some people now actually believe in this stuff – and that it is driving them insane.
LikeLike
As a woman, I couldn’t agree more with you. I have seen far too many people who cannot deal with their own decision’s consequences/regrets. I found the current feminism an assault to women’s capacities and dignity, and the victimization of “minorities” is only going to add to that pile
LikeLike
it is actually very sad – this person agrees to sexual intercourse and then regrets it – she has terrible feelings about the act.
But to blame men is totally wrong. Razi G. is correct – this person, Lux Alptraum, should look to her own behaviour and see that she is doing things that make her unhappy.
LikeLike
It is sad. I don’t want to venture into this person’s mind too deeply, but it is clear that her intellectual history has not protected her from the boundary pushing she reports. Christian conservative ideas and objectivist atheistic ones would have helped support her sense of self and given her the to confidence not to agree to sex simply to avoid a negative conversation. She does not consider the possibility her ideology let her down and caused her to accept victimisation (without any apparent effort or coordination on the part of the “perpetrators”) and instead invents an actively hostile culture, apparently missing the weak willed culture of victimhood which she herself is involved in reinforcing.
LikeLike
Just looking for a bit of scale here: If we have ‘micro-aggressions’ (which of course in reality aren’t ‘aggressions’) but are very serious, and ‘aggressions’, then presumably there are ‘macro-aggressions’ too, but what might they be?
And Razi refers to people having a ‘capacity to be rational’, I have to say I sometimes wonder if such a capacity exists in some people, it might just be simulated or chanced upon in some instances. Mind you, this is usually after I have done a ‘Jack Russell-esque’ attack on what passes for logic and reason from them.
LikeLike
You’re a dangerous dog, Mr Ed. A dangerous dog. ;>)
LikeLike
I wish I had more time to reflect and comment on this but I only have a short time before I get up and go to work tomorrow so having read Razi’s comments and what the lady actually wrote. I thought I’d share some observations.
I don’t agree that what happened to her is rape and I don’t think any close reading of the article suggests that author thinks this is what happened to her either. She is certainly searching for the words to make sense with what happened to her, sometime they are accurate, sometimes they are ambiguous and sometimes they are woefully inaccurate.
One thing I certainly disagree with Razi is the idea that she is not engaging in introspection. Of course she is doing that and on a public platform to boot she is open to instant feedback. She stated she used to feel shame and guilt for the fact that she did what she knew was the wrong action and then blamed herself entirely for the encounters. She then uses some feminist critical analysis to understand how she and the jerks she dated came to act how she did. In a word socialisation. If this helps her to cope and process through the shame and guilt then I won’t begrudge her sloppy labels and wording.
But I digress, I should pretend to more outraged. Ok Leigh-Anne deep breath now. “OMG what a man hating nazi-feminist who crys rape at the drop of a hat because she doesn’t want to take responsibility that she is a slut and can’t keep her pants on.”
LikeLike
Your final comment, which appears to be a joke, I found confusing. For the purposes of clarity (for your sake and for that of others) I do not think you ought to feel the need to pretend to be outraged.
You have not expressed approval for what Razi considers inappropriate, if you are able to understand and forgive it then that would certainly add to the debate.
LikeLike