You've all heard it. "What does it matter who rapes?" "Would it be better for the victim if the rapist were of a different ethnicity?" "You only care about rape when foreigners do it!" The list goes on and on..
Certain ethnic groups rape a lot. Everybody knows that. Even the progressives rape-apologists trying to hide the fact. And people get really angry about it. The progressives counter this by implying that the ones complaining about it are racist and it usually doesn't take long until somebody parallels men getting angry at the rapey foreigners with them wanting to do the raping themselves because - you know - they respond stronger to a foreigner raping than to one of their own raping.
This seems to be a winning tactic to the progressives. The usual response is cuckery and explaining something half-hearted about statistics and agreeing to the premise that it doesn't matter who rapes, all rapists are the same, and the anti-racist creed: I don't care who rapes. I'm here to argue that it matters who rapes. Yes, you read correctly. It matters who rapes.
Why does it matter? Because the native women are our property and it's a violation to our property rights? Well, that's the phrase everybody seems to be terrified to hear and not quite what I'm going to say. It matters because of war.
We are at war. It may be low-intensity and burning slowly, but our civilizations and theirs are at war. Not in the way warfare is understood in Europe as massive armies meeting on rolling hills, camping down to wait for a better moment to attack and then fronts closing in and tons of men chopped to pieces, but in a more primitive way where different groups cohabit closely and battle daily for territory and resources. This war knows no Geneva conventions about combatants wearing their uniforms not treatment of prisoners of war and civilians. Civilians are free game, as they always have been in the history of warfare, and not just that. Civilians are the soft target through witch you can hurt the enemy without risking your own behind.
Rape has always been a part of warfare. It is something so deeply rooted that it almost always happens as an epidemic when an army invades enemy territory. Let's take a look at Wikipedia for a moment.
Wartime sexual violence is rape or other forms of sexual violence committed by combatants during armed conflict or war or military occupation often as spoils of war; but sometimes, particularly in ethnic conflict, the phenomenon has broader sociological motives. Wartime sexual violence may also include gang rape and rape with objects. It is distinguished from sexual assaults and rape committed amongst troops in military service. It also covers the situation where girls and women are forced into prostitution or sexual slavery by an occupying power.
During war and armed conflict, rape is frequently used as a means of psychological warfare in order to humiliate the enemy. Wartime sexual violence may occur in a variety of situations, including institutionalized sexual slavery, wartime sexual violence associated with specific battles or massacres, and individual or isolated acts of sexual violence.
Rape can also be recognized as genocide and/or ethnic cleansing when committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a targeted group; however, rape remains widespread in conflict zones. ...
The effects of war rape include the obvious physical and psychological damage, but there is one thing in Wikipedia that explains what is really going on:
In addition to the physical and psychological damages resulting from rape, sexual violence in the context of war often disrupt the linkages between the rape victims and their communities. Thus, the phenomenon of war rape can structurally affect entire societies, which is closely linked to the logic underlying the strategic use of rape as an instrument in armed conflicts. Raping ‘enemy’ women also constitutes an act of abuse and humiliation against the men of the community the victims were representative of.
Rape sends a message to the whole tribe: Your men can't protect you. We are in charge here.
It is humiliating to men who have an urge to protect their in-group. It emasculates them and renders them powerless. It makes the women fearful and lose respect and loyalty to their men. The same goes for the quasi-institutionalized sexual exploitation of young native girls such as the one in Rotherham - It's about destroying the bond between the male protectors and the female birth-givers to cause a long lasting trauma in the occupied population. When the woman get's pregnant and gives birth that child will forever be a reminder of the humiliation the tribe suffered in the hands of the attackers.
This is what you are thinking when you read about a stranger raping one of your girls and more importantly - this is what the rapist is thinking too. Don't let the progressive hacks fool you, we are tribalistic and primitive, and even if you weren't the other guys will be. It matters who rapes. When a native man rapes a native woman, the men get angry because that is a a violation against the woman and also the norms of the society, but when the stranger does it it's a violation against the whole tribe - especially when it happens systematically and commonly. Don't be afraid to speak the truth. It matters who rapes.