Maria — I did. As a news junkie, I had already read the articles you referenced, long before you suggested them. They are part of the living bibliography I maintain — a personal archive of journalism that documents precisely the kinds of failures I argue against. I revisited them the moment you cited them, not out of unfamiliarity, but because their contents have shaped my perspective — and they reaffirm it still.
Let me also be clear: my advocacy for armed self-defense is directed toward women living in the United States because here — uniquely in human history — women possess the rare privilege of the Second Amendment. Where that right exists, it should be exercised boldly and without apology. Where it does not, the calculus of response certainly changes — but the conviction behind it does not.
The method may differ, but the principle does not: learn, train, prepare, defend. If a firearm is unavailable, sharpen every other tool at your disposal — situational awareness, self-defense training, community vigilance — because while the means may vary, the moral truth remains unchanged: a woman is not obligated to be a polite victim. She is obligated to live courageously.
And perhaps unintentionally, by offering those very articles in response to my argument, you provided the most devastating confirmation of my position imaginable. Because what those stories reveal is not the triumph of state protection, not the heroism of bureaucracy, not the saving grace of disarmed dependence — but precisely the opposite.
They are horror stories — tragic accounts of institutional failure on a scale that should unsettle every thinking person. And they vindicate my central claim beyond all reasonable doubt: when evil comes for you — whether it wears a uniform, holds a title, or lurks in the shadows — you had better be ready to defend yourself. Because the state will arrive late. If it arrives at all.
In the case of the UK armed forces article, what we see is a military described openly as a “hunting ground” for predators. Women were brutalized not by foreign enemies but by the very men sworn to protect them. They were silenced, isolated, and forced to live alongside their abusers within a system that often protected perpetrators more than victims. And what was the proposed solution? More oversight. More policies. More paperwork. But no policy has ever stopped a rapist in the act. Only force does that. That is the distinction between ideological fantasy and lived reality.
In the case of Pieper Lewis — a 15-year-old girl trafficked, abused, and ultimately forced to kill her rapist — we see a court sentence her not only to probation but to pay restitution to the family of the very man who exploited her. And this — somehow — is offered to me as a counterargument against self-defense? On the contrary, this is the smoking gun in its favor. The justice system failed her. Society failed her. But in that moment — when her life and dignity were on the line — she refused to fail herself. She fought back. She lived. And we dare to condemn her for that?
And then there is the Pelicot case in France — a woman drugged by her husband and raped by fifty men over a decade, recorded, exploited, and forgotten. When justice finally arrived, it looked nothing like justice at all. Twenty years for the man who orchestrated it. A few years for the others. A woman treated as an object — then told afterward this was the best the system could offer. If ever there were a case for rejecting the passive victimhood feminism often prescribes — for embracing personal defense as a necessity rather than a choice — this is it. Not because the world should be this way. But because it is.
This is the hard truth feminism cannot escape: women cannot outsource their safety to systems. Systems are slow. Systems are corruptible. Systems are often indifferent. The greatest lie modern feminism tells women is that safety will come through awareness campaigns, social media hashtags, or institutional reforms alone. No. Safety comes through personal responsibility, preparation, and the courage to act when no one else will. Trust yourself. Train yourself. Arm yourself. Because the world is not safe. It never has been. But safety was never the promise of civilization. Responsibility was.
And so my position not only stands — it stands stronger than before. I do not deny violence against women. I deny the false solutions offered to prevent it. A woman trained in self-defense — armed, competent, and mentally prepared to fight for her life — terrifies a predator in a way no bureaucracy ever will. She is not a victim waiting for justice. She is justice. And that — not hashtags, not bureaucrats, not awareness campaigns — is the only deterrent evil truly fears.
The final irony is this: the very articles you offered to refute me have done something far greater — they have proven me right. And I thank you for it.
Maria — I did. As a news junkie, I had already read the articles you referenced, long before you suggested them. They are part of the living bibliography I maintain — a personal archive of journalism that documents precisely the kinds of failures I argue against. I revisited them the moment you cited them, not out of unfamiliarity, but because their contents have shaped my perspective — and they reaffirm it still.
Let me also be clear: my advocacy for armed self-defense is directed toward women living in the United States because here — uniquely in human history — women possess the rare privilege of the Second Amendment. Where that right exists, it should be exercised boldly and without apology. Where it does not, the calculus of response certainly changes — but the conviction behind it does not.
The method may differ, but the principle does not: learn, train, prepare, defend. If a firearm is unavailable, sharpen every other tool at your disposal — situational awareness, self-defense training, community vigilance — because while the means may vary, the moral truth remains unchanged: a woman is not obligated to be a polite victim. She is obligated to live courageously.
And perhaps unintentionally, by offering those very articles in response to my argument, you provided the most devastating confirmation of my position imaginable. Because what those stories reveal is not the triumph of state protection, not the heroism of bureaucracy, not the saving grace of disarmed dependence — but precisely the opposite.
They are horror stories — tragic accounts of institutional failure on a scale that should unsettle every thinking person. And they vindicate my central claim beyond all reasonable doubt: when evil comes for you — whether it wears a uniform, holds a title, or lurks in the shadows — you had better be ready to defend yourself. Because the state will arrive late. If it arrives at all.
In the case of the UK armed forces article, what we see is a military described openly as a “hunting ground” for predators. Women were brutalized not by foreign enemies but by the very men sworn to protect them. They were silenced, isolated, and forced to live alongside their abusers within a system that often protected perpetrators more than victims. And what was the proposed solution? More oversight. More policies. More paperwork. But no policy has ever stopped a rapist in the act. Only force does that. That is the distinction between ideological fantasy and lived reality.
In the case of Pieper Lewis — a 15-year-old girl trafficked, abused, and ultimately forced to kill her rapist — we see a court sentence her not only to probation but to pay restitution to the family of the very man who exploited her. And this — somehow — is offered to me as a counterargument against self-defense? On the contrary, this is the smoking gun in its favor. The justice system failed her. Society failed her. But in that moment — when her life and dignity were on the line — she refused to fail herself. She fought back. She lived. And we dare to condemn her for that?
And then there is the Pelicot case in France — a woman drugged by her husband and raped by fifty men over a decade, recorded, exploited, and forgotten. When justice finally arrived, it looked nothing like justice at all. Twenty years for the man who orchestrated it. A few years for the others. A woman treated as an object — then told afterward this was the best the system could offer. If ever there were a case for rejecting the passive victimhood feminism often prescribes — for embracing personal defense as a necessity rather than a choice — this is it. Not because the world should be this way. But because it is.
This is the hard truth feminism cannot escape: women cannot outsource their safety to systems. Systems are slow. Systems are corruptible. Systems are often indifferent. The greatest lie modern feminism tells women is that safety will come through awareness campaigns, social media hashtags, or institutional reforms alone. No. Safety comes through personal responsibility, preparation, and the courage to act when no one else will. Trust yourself. Train yourself. Arm yourself. Because the world is not safe. It never has been. But safety was never the promise of civilization. Responsibility was.
And so my position not only stands — it stands stronger than before. I do not deny violence against women. I deny the false solutions offered to prevent it. A woman trained in self-defense — armed, competent, and mentally prepared to fight for her life — terrifies a predator in a way no bureaucracy ever will. She is not a victim waiting for justice. She is justice. And that — not hashtags, not bureaucrats, not awareness campaigns — is the only deterrent evil truly fears.
The final irony is this: the very articles you offered to refute me have done something far greater — they have proven me right. And I thank you for it.