This article must be talked about; it just cries “WRITE ABOUT ME”, and so I will (I am obliged to).

The future of sex in the UK seems to be “if you have a vagina, you can put any man in prison unless he records the whole seduction process or makes you sign papers where you write down everything that happened in meticulous detail.” This is not a joke, this is actually happening.

The Article Itself

Let me dissect the article a little. Subtitle: “New guidance will be issued to all police forces and prosecutors as part of a ‘toolkit’ to move rape investigations into the 21st century” (emphasis in this article always mine).”

To begin with, notice how the law addresses solely women being raped by men, even though in 2011/2012, 6.61% of victims of sexual assault and rape (combined) were men (page 20, figure 3.1). Also, there were 9,000 males raped per year versus 69,000 between 2009-2010 and 2011-2012. I’m guessing, however, that males are irrelevant in the eyes of the law and do not deserve a law to be applied to them; laws must be applied preferentially to one group, not justly to everyone.

It was necessary to quote it in full. From the moment the law gets the Royal Assent (the formal date that the law comes into force, when the Queen signs it), ALL police forces and prosecutors in this country will have to change their views of rape, of consent, of sexual assault and of how to pursue claims related to those. Thus, it will change the whole methodology itself.

Further, it proclaims to be a “progressive”™ change into the legal system. Apparently, if a woman does not inform in a legally verifiable (!) manner anyone who will provide that evidence in a court (police, witnesses etc.) of her consent then she can sue for being raped. This is considered progress™. The word itself comes from pro- (forward) and gradi (to walk): progredi in Latin, meaning thence “to walk forward”. In a way, we are walking forward; however, in front of us I see a cliff and not green pastures.

pic 1

Moving on,

“men accused of date rape will need to convince police that a woman consented to sex”.

Good luck with that, fellow UK males! Make sure you bring papers from your lawyer (your solicitor) with the right phrasing and a pen so your sexual partner can sign them. If you don’t have any, then be sure she consents to a short video of her saying she consents to sex. It could sound like this: “I, (insert female name here), hereby declare that proud of the law, I consent to (number of minutes) of sex with (male name) in (positions named/described).”

With a hand on her chest and tears in her eyes, while singing the national anthem, she would be credible.

“Alison Saunders said rape victims should no longer be “blamed” by society if they are too drunk to consent to sex…”

This is perfectly true; we should blame the evil patriarchy for selling alcohol to women. The only rational answer is to ration the alcohol allowance of each person. Similar to how people in the Soviet Union were only allowed one bread per day per family and one kilogram of cooking oil per week, so shall women be allowed two martinis OR one beer OR half a shot per evening.


Do not teach women not to get blackout drunk; that is a grave error. Teach men to only have sex with women when women are fully sober and to always refuse to hit on a drunk girl. In fact, men should be given breathalyzers and they should ask every woman to blow into it. If she is too drunk to drive then she is too drunk for sex.

pic 2

Men, carry one with you every evening!

“Campaigners described the move as “a huge step forward” in ensuring fewer rapists escape justice.”

They spelt innocent men wrong, they wrote it as “rapists.”

Nevermind, also, that a woman (on the same website) wrote about the absurdity of victims never bearing any responsibility for their bodies, minds, and wellbeing. Just ignore her, she might have been a patriarchal double-agent.

“We want police and prosecutors to make sure they ask in every case where consent is the issue – how did the suspect know the complainant was saying yes and doing so freely and knowingly?”

Indeed, how does the suspect know she was saying yes? Are the following clear indications or are they worthless?

a) the woman was undressing herself
b) the woman was undressing the man
c) the woman was kissing the man
d) the woman did not push him away when he started kissing her
e) the woman did not try to run away or try to hit the man or try to stop him when he was putting a condom on (assuming he had one)

Do the above prove consent had taken place? Does the woman need to explicitly state consent?

“The new guidance also covers domestic violence situations and those where ‘the complainant may be financially or otherwise dependent on their alleged rapist.’”

In other words, if you are married and your wife has a much lower income than you (which means you are a male provider), then she can sue you any day she likes for being raped. Once that happens, you wake up in court for having provided for your family and YOU need to provide evidence that she consented to sex last week. Good luck to all married UK men!

“The most recent figures showed that just 15,670 women reported rapes to the police, often because they thought it would be impossible to prove the offence, or because they did not have any confidence in the police’s ability to help them…”

To address that, Alison Saunders thought it’s a good idea to trust hear-say evidence and bypass every legal requirement that took centuries to develop to prevent malicious prosecution that lacks evidence. Obviously, the police is also not worthy of women’s trust. The police clearly cannot help anyone with anything. In fact, we would all have been better off reporting crimes to Don Corleone.


The only logical conclusion when you don’t like the laws of a country (or when they allow others to end your life in a few minutes, just by talking) the only solutions are a) to change the laws, or b) to move out of the country. Changing the law is impossible at the moment since feminists enact laws. Of course, in the future Sharia Law may gain more power; presently, there are 85 Sharia courts in the UK.

Moving out of the country seems to be the only sensible thing for an individual. Of course, there is also option c: behave well towards your woman and hope (yes, HOPE) that she doesn’t get bored by you and that she doesn’t start loathing you. This is based mostly on luck, for unless you are an alpha provider who alternates between alpha game and romantic game, then you can never be sure of what may happen.

Read More: Say Hello to the New Definition of Rape

Send this to a friend