I didn’t find it in the link from the OP. Is there some place specific in her archives that I should be looking?
Pretty amusing excuses, coming from the peanut gallery that just raised a stink about whether raising kids is a “real job.”
Shows what YOU know. Mules are the Little Black Dress of the shoe world and are NEVER out!
God, can you imagine getting kicked with them by someone who knew what she was doing? “Here’s a 3” heel in your kisser, asshole!"
Ooookay. I must say I disagree. If Ann Coulter feels that date rape is not real rape…and that passage strongly suggests that she does…then my urge to send Ms. Coulter to Camp Get-A-Clue is not mitigated by the fact that she only mentioned it in passing. The fact that it wasn’t the main point of her argument only suggests that she takes that point for granted, which makes Camp Get-A-Clue that much more necessary but doesn’t increase or decrease my level of umbrage.
If we started invading other countries–in the name of regime-change–because of the presence of rape as an official policy, we’re soon going to have to go after some of our “allies” in the so-called War on Terror.
It is there. Paragraph 7, which starts, "Speaking of which, where are the feminists on war with Iraq? "
And I’d bet dollars to doughnuts that her using the phrasing that presumes the “real” rape is that which is done using direct physical force against resistance, was done “deliberately and with malice aforethought”, precisely so that people would raise a ruckus over it.
She doesn’t really care if there are fools on the right who believe that her statements-made-for-shock-value are true issues-advocacy. She just cares about being able to smirk all the way to the bank at the rest of us.
Okay, I found it, thanks. I got a bit worried, see, when I read the bit from you OP that began:
and I thought, “what, again?” :eek:
An equally valid interpretation is that she hadn’t given the issue any thought - not that she takes it for granted, but that she simply carelessly used the phrase without parsing it thoroughly. As much as I enjoy Ms. Coulter’s work, she does not strike me as someone that carefully analyzes every nuance of every sentence before she pronounces a column ready for publication. Were it a main thesis of her work, of course, this interpretation would be impossible.
- Rick
Not that it’s particularly laudable either way.
Do you want another terrorist attack?!
She probably hires a couple thugs to hold her down while her hubby does the nasty on her.
How so?
Of course. But one is odiously insulting to victims of rape; the other is merely careless in discussing the crime.
The woman is a lawyer. She should know what date rape is.
Along the same lines, it’s also not “real” rape if you can catch her – after all, if she really, REALLY didn’t want to do it with you, she’d manage that extra burst of speed when she needed it.
:rolleyes:
The only possible excuse would be that she didn’t know what date rape was, and felt it was unnecessary to do even a couple minutes of research on it because, after all, she was only mentioning it once.
Actually, even that isn’t much of an excuse.
And it isn’t true, either, because she mentions date rape in other parts of her book as well, talking about investigations of date rape at universities.
She obviously knows what it is, and she doesn’t think it is real rape. In other words, she is an aggressively abhorrent lifeform. What a shock.
Maybe she thinks rape needs no qualifiers?
:eek: :eek: 
You’d have to be pretty fucking heartless to be careless about rape.
My above post is in response to Bricker.