Mattress Girl Emma Sulkowicz NOW Award, Copulates for The Sake of Art, and As Usual, Displays her Tireless Narcissism

An excellent talk on the narcissist smear campaign and the manipulations used to gain sympathy and followers by becoming a victim. This bears watching in order to get a different viewpoint on the facts regarding the actions and words of Emma Sulcowicz in the context of her life following the breakup between she and her old boyfriend who she later accused of physical assault and rape.

I thought that if you deny, disparage, or otherwise attempt to negate another human being's opinion while making direct reference to their skin color, you are a racist. Am I right? It's almost comical to see Emma Sulkowicz throw the racist card when it suits--a juvenile way of avoiding the issue and labeling the messenger. It's also fascinating to see how she's evolved her victim status to such a fine edge that even broaching the subject of healing with an unsuitable phrase is potentially an act of violence. So much for ascending from victim to survivor. Of course, the survivor rung is in the future. Emma has only to reinvent herself again into a state of "survivor art." Oh, and btw, Emma doesn't have a problem with white women giving her awards or praising her, just so long as no one suggests she actually transcend and grow as a woman.

Fascinating. Sulkowicz has declared an indefinite victim status. How long can she play it out, you ask? Her "fear" must be validated. But what is she still afraid of? She doesn't say. And of course, she pats herself on the back at the end. She did it "my way" and the "unexpected right thing." What could that be? Lugging a mattress across campus for the camera? Nevertheless, she has attained the moral high ground as both victim and self-righteous being. 

Who can doubt her?

In this context, any ostensible ascendance from victim status, especially at this time, is not a good idea. The victim has become inextricable from the art, and the art forever fused with the victim.

It would not be difficult to characterize her entire display related to the alleged rape as an ongoing exercise in childish dishonesty and narcissism thinly disguised as activism. Not difficult at all. Here is a great timeline regarding the Emma Sulkowicz issues. Read it. Note her interactions with the university and her lack of cooperation. Her schedule just didn't match their schedule. Darn! Also, please take time to read the record of her conversations with her victim regarding their sex romps; and if you can't see dishonesty and narcissism on this page, and after watching the video recreation of her alleged rape, then IMO you have blinders on.

Here is one screenshot of the staged rape reenactment:

This is actually Emma Sulkowicz having sex with a porn actor --
complete with violence and an acting out of her distress with loud cries

I can't and won't stream her porn-ish video "art" on this blog, but you have to see this to believe it! It's simply amazing that even someone as narcissistic and dishonest and blameless as Emma Sulkowicz, trans-frankensteined by NOW and others into the perfect archetypal victim of "male power structure," willingly, and with such theatrical relish, allows herself to be "raped" on camera by a porno actor. I just never would have believed something like this, in this context, could take place, but it has. Emma did it. She found a way to launch herself into the media once again, to take center stage at all costs.

If I were ill, the sight of her copulating with this ugly bastard would make me vomit. How

Her NOW Award for Courage

can she stand to look at him much less absorb his rod? 

What in living hell is wrong with this woman? What kind of dark obsession makes this possible? As a dabbler in psychology, I see the reenactment of the violent parts (the slapping and choking) as metaphor for her emotional state in reaction to her lover parting ways with her. She felt slapped and choked by his betrayal. This was translated into an act of consensual sex becoming non-consensual. What began as an act of love evolved to an act of disappointment and ugliness, precisely like the arc of her relationship with him. The act of rape accusation thus became a "wetting of the brushes" for the school art project, a necessary condition and springboard to good grades and fame. 

In this context, any ostensible ascendance from victim status, especially at this time, is not a good idea. The victim has become inextricable from the art, and the art forever fused with the victim. A transcendence of the artist is therefore not only politically unwise, but artistically unwise. Not a good career move. 

Her lover Paul was certainly used by her. And why not? Emma rationalizes it's all the "right thing" to do. It serves the cause, and it serves her. Paul is therefore expendable. And he did betray her, didn't he? She loved him. He spurned her. 

At least he can serve a good purpose.

Observe below how the young feminist women attempt

to defend the rape video as legitimate. 

 

________

DID ‘MATTRESS GIRL’ TELL THE TRUTH?  NOT VERY LIKELY

CATHY YOUNG 

At least for now, Columbia’s mattress saga is over. Emma Sulkowicz, the student who spent her final year on campus toting a mattress to protest the school’s failure to punish her alleged rapist, graduated at the end of May; so did Paul Nungesser, the accused man who says he’s the real victim.

There was more drama at graduation: Sulkowicz toted her mattress onstage in defiance of school regulations and later accused Columbia president Lee Bollinger of snubbing her. In related news, posters branding Sulkowicz a liar cropped up near the campus; Nungesser was reported cleared on the last sexual assault complaint against him, this one from a male student; and, the next day, one of his two anonymous female accusers told her story on the feminist blog Jezebel.

An attempt at summing up this messy saga and its lessons comes from Emily Bazelon via Sunday’s New York Times Magazine. Bazelon admits that l’affaire Sulkowicz drama highlights major problems with the current system of Title IX-based campus “justice”—including “utter lack of transparency,” which is not a bug but a feature of the system: federal law stringently protects the privacy of students involved in disciplinary cases. As a result, in an alleged rape case that has attracted international attention and scrutiny, we are mostly left with he said/she said accounts not only of what happened between Nungesser and his accusers, but of how the complaints were handled by the university. The records exist, including transcripts and video recordings of the hearings; but they are off-limits and likely to remain so.

Dispensing with Due Process

Bazelon believes this fiasco is a result of the current system’s growing pains—of “a transitional period in the evolution of how universities handle sexual assault.” But it’s hard to see what reforms would fix the problem. Even if school staff are better trained to investigate sexual misconduct reports—assuming that “better training” actually means more effective fact-finding, not more faithful adherence to believe-the-survivor dogma—this would not address the underlying issue: that activists like Sulkowicz want to dispense with any semblance of due process and refuse to respect any result other than culpability and punishment.

(Incidentally, while Bazelon correctly notes that “rape is extremely difficult to prosecute both effectively and fairly,” the kind of violent attack that Sulkowicz alleges—an excruciatingly painful anal rape during which she was hit in the face, choked within an inch of her life, and pinned by the arms—would be quite easy to prove, at least if promptly reported to the police. The physical evidence would have been overwhelming.)

MORE FROM CATHY YOUNG HERE

Can We Hear The Rape Radio Through All The Media Static?

Professor Schulhofer Intrudes Like a True Crusader

The American Law Institute (ALI) resoundingly rejected as impractical and unconstitutional an effort by sex negative feminists and their allies in the ALI like Professors Schulhofer and his grim sidekick Erin Murphy to "reshape American sexual norms" by creating a draconian new penal code that would have given courts all over the country the necessary guidance and confidence to sentence to hard prison time tens of thousands of men for "sex crimes" ranging from attempted hand holding to kissing--in reality to every single stage and sub-stage leading to intercourse (whether or not it was achieved); and if the man could not prove he obtained "prior affirmative consent" for each rung of the sex ladder (with a theoretically endless number of rungs)  he climbed, the threat of cold prison steel would be a fact--not to mention a ruined life, lost job, sex offender registry, and so forth.

And if you are skeptical regarding what I've said above, see this piece on Professor Schulhofer and the rest of the good old "gavel and cage 'em" gang. Given that ALI and non-ALI sex negatives alike naturally share the view that sex is an unceasing act of predation that must be micromanaged in order to protect a woman's body (under threat of violation each moment she is in the presence of men), it's not surprising that even married men and long-standing relationships were on the chopping block. One "unsolicited" or "consent lacking" sexual touch and days, weeks or even years later, the jaws of prison would become a distinct possibility if the prosecutor wished to pursue. With thousands of men potentially incarcerated for such "offenses" enabled to insane reality by an affirmative consent penal code, you begin to wonder why some men believe The War on Men isn't a myth but a reality? To say that sex negative feminists applaud and support this movement towards affirmative consent and vastly expanded punitive action is an understatement.

But I digress a bit.

Self-defined Sex Negative Person

Similar to the sex-negative penal code above, the Affirmative Consent laws for colleges now living and breathing in states like California and New York, do their best to significantly increase the numbers of sex offenses while simultaneously making it impossible for the accused (invariably a man) to defend themselves. This has resulted in dozens of lawsuits against colleges across the nation, and it's no wonder since the colleges effectively remove most if not all of due process procedure when judging the accused in order to more easily facilitate findings of guilt. The supporters of these conditions have also conjured the horror of the male serial rapist roaming campuses all across America, and in the thousands, but I can't understand why not a single one of these serial offenders has yet been tagged and caged. Not even one... Hmmmm? Could it be a myth?

Regardless, the sex-negative feminists, together with their state and university lobbyists and social media supporters, are transparently overreaching to extend the rape and assault umbrella over sexual acts that are considered consensual by both parties at the time. They also wish to enable post-coitus reconsideration and group discussion that results weeks, months, or even years later in a finding of technical "rape" due to the presence of alcohol and/or lack of "affirmative consent"--itself a hydra of legal issues and constitutional infractions (noted above). The sex negatives at Harvard, e.g., basically want men accused of rape 24/7 regardless of circumstances, since they argue we women can't give consent with any real certainty because we're mind controlled by the patriarchy.  OMG! And who does this mentally ill BS really serve?

And what is the result of all the above?

Once we wade through the court cases overturning affirmative consent convictions now mixed with aggressive sex negative lobbying and the redefining of sex as criminal, coupled with talk of thousands of stalking serial rapists and obsessive media coverage of absurdly overblown cases like the Mattress Girl of Columbia and Jackie of UVA, what do we have? Maximum static. And what else? An ever growing amount of apathy as a result while the static gets louder and louder. Even media outlets notably biased against men in their reporting and editorials thrive on the controversial cases such as the ones at Columbia, Duke University, and UVA. After all, just plain old rape is dull news. Grandstanding mattress hauling and fantasized gang rapes worthy of Clockwork Orange bring in more readers and advertising clicks.

Am I being cynical? No. Just realistic.

When every woman is potentially assaulted and raped, no woman is assaulted and raped. As waves of unceasing news and social media static often drown out or marginalize real victims of sexual assault and rape, the American public loses their ability to focus and sympathize. Real victims are made to seem like oversensitive girls manufacturing a crime long after the fact, or attention-seekers grandstanding their victimhood, or just plain liars out for revenge. It's the oh-here-we-go-again cry wolf effect. How much more obvious can all this be?

When every woman is potentially assaulted and raped, no woman is assaulted and raped. As waves of unceasing news and social media static often drown out or marginalize real victims of sexual assault and rape, the American public loses their ability to focus and sympathize.

This is where we're at now and it's getting worse. By doing whatever it takes to greatly expand definitions of rape and sexual assault while smearing the Constitution as a "document written by rapists" and cheering on 24/7 victim theater in its many forms, the many sex negative feminists on college campuses and elsewhere--in their quest to punish and belittle men by whatever means necessary--are now in the process of undoing all that anti-rape activists have fought for, and over the course of many years.

Let them combine with the commercial news media to once again force us to endure a few more debacles like the Duke lacrosse case or gang rape UVA and we'll practically guarantee that not a single victim of real rape will be heard. She'll be typecast as just another embittered hoaxer or deluded fraud.

BTW, does everyone know that Mattress Girl is a star in her own porno film online now? She calls it art, but you can judge for yourself.

Personally, I am disgusted by it on every level.