TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Only boys punished in underaged sex???

SeaPerformance

February 27, 2018
24 upvotes
/r/MensRights

https://www.bostoncriminalattorneyblog.com/2009/02/massachusetts_supreme_court_se_1.html

https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-teen-rape-double-standard

Why is there this discrepancy?

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Only boys punished in underaged sex???
Author

SeaPerformance

Upvotes 24
Comments 15
Date February 27, 2018 6:20 AM UTC
(8 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/80k8wd/only_boys_punished_in_underaged_sex/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/only-boys-punished-in-underaged-sex.905288
https://theredarchive.com/post/905288
Red Pill terms in post
double standards

Comments

[–]mwobuddy 10 points11 points12 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

In the 1800's the suffragettes demanded a raising of age of consent from 13 to 21.

As harbingers of equality, they did not seek for males to be protected by age of consent laws until the 70's (think gay older men/stonewall).

Age of consent presumes that female sexuality is valuable, and male sexuality valueless.

This is true if you look at the biology: How many descendants are Genghis Khans? Because 1 man can seed 1000 women.

The biological issue becomes a cultural issue which demands protection of the valuable commodity, and suffragettes/feminists believe in that value by promoting males who sleep with underage females as monsters, and completely silent on the issue when females fuck underage males.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago* (13 children) | Copy Link

I am so sick of this bullshit. Charging children with rape even though theyre all underage?! What the hell kind of fucked up circus is this? What's next? Are we gonna start telling kids it's illegal for them to masturbate too cuz they'll be statutorily raping themselves?

[–]armed_renegade 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

No joke, if a 14 year old girl/boy took a photo of their genitals or similar, and sent it to their boyfriend/girlfriend that is technically "distribution of child porn".

I'd put money on only the boys in each of the situations being punished, if any punishment ever eventuated

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

How the hell any jury in this country hears thsee kinds of cases and doesn't just immediately find them not guilty is beyond me. Jury nullification is a thing! Use it! Of course the fact that a law specifically forbidding children under 18 from having sex with each other is still on the books is just beyond stupid in the firSt place.

[–]armed_renegade 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Well there isn't. The age of consent in most of the developed world is 16 (anal sex being 18 years old in most places as well). An adult can legally have sex with someone 16 years and older.

Legally there's nothing against the law between two 16 year olds having sex or having a sexual relationship.

There are provisions in the law, at least here in Australia, and I believe they also exist in the US, where even if one person is over 16 (still under 18), and the other is under 16 (not including if the other is a lot younger) where if there is an actual relationship, the court can choose to dismiss the case. (Obviously if it were between a 17 year old and a 13 year old this would be a different case)

And if both children are under 16, then the police are very unlikely to even charge two 15 year olds, or a 15 year old and a 14 year old.

[–]subzero_600 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The laws in Australia are as follows as best as I can recall. For the ages between 10 and 16, the older party cannot be more than 2 years older than the younger party for the sex to be consensual. i.e, not considersd statutorily rape. Between 16 and 18, the older party cannot be on a position of authority over the younger.

[–]armed_renegade 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I've heard this before, but I can't find any actual evidence for this, in the crimes act, or any other criminal Act.

It appears to be at the discretion of the judge, and what might be considered a "common sense" approach.

Given the age of consent is 16, I don't believe that there is any rule people 16-18 years old. Given legally, a 60 year old and a 16 year old could get it on.

[–]subzero_600 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/age-consent-laws

It does vary by state but this gives the general outline for each state. You are right, it does depend on the judge in each case.

[–]bakedpotato486 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I was summoned to be on a jury this past Monday, went through the whole selection process but wasn't selected myself. Juries are explicitly told to apply the law as described by the judge. Told not to do any research on their own. They're excruciatingly quizzed to ensure lack of bias, and asked to leave their opinions at the door.

A jury as the court seems to intend it is not a jury of your peers. It's a bunch of little mindless judge-clones.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah basically if I'm ever on jury I'm just going to ignore everything they tell me, just listen to the case, and vote the way I see fit. Jury nullification is always a viable option as much as they'll try to hide the fact that such a thing even exists. For anyone that doesn't know: jury nullification is when a jury finds a defendant not guilty even if they have broken the law they're being accused of breaking due to the law itself being ridiculous or just morally reprehensible and thanks to double jeopardy, if a jury finds you not guilty you can't be tried again.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There was a case where a boy was charged as an adult for having child porn of himself (a minor)

[–]Wylanderuk 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You would lose the bet, I remember a case in the US a couple of years ago with a girl getting charged with making, distributing and possessing child porn over this.

[–]armed_renegade 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

As in a minor? Pictures of herself?

Care to share any links?

[–]bakedpotato486 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It's bad for boys to masturbate, so we chop off bits of their dicks in hopes that they don't.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Jokes on them!

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter