~ archived since 2018 ~

So when women do it, jail isn’t needed...

Sinner12180

April 21, 2018

60 upvotes

/r/MensRights

Archived from /r/MensRights

r/MensRights is a community advocating for the social and legal equality of men and boys since 2008.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

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

PDF TXT EPUB

Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Post Information

Title	So when women do it, jail isn’t needed...
Author	Sinner12180
Upvotes	60
Comments	25
Date	April 21, 2018 12:55 AM UTC (8 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/8dsgyo/so_when_women_do_it_jail_isnt_needed/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/so-when-women-do-it-jail-isnt-needed.902519 https://theredarchive.com/post/902519

Comments

[–]runner557 6 points7 points8 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]HeForeverBleeds 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]randezvouswithrama 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]DownvotedByShitters 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]HBK05 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]2018Now2018New 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ckiemnstr345 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]2018Now2018New 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mwobuddy 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]HBK05 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]mwobuddy 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]thrway_1000 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Neko404 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nascarracer99316 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Nude-eh 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

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

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Nude-eh 5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mwobuddy 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

It is just sex.

Consider that the law's reason is 'to prevent coercion anda buse'.

Is feeling like shit after sex or a relationship ends abusive or coercive? Then all teen on teen relations and sex should be illegal, too. And teens are coercive to each other at very high rates. And teens beocme more suicidal or depressed after consenting sex with other teens. This indicates there is no 'victim' of greater magnitude simply because the person they had sex with was older.

Imagine if the AoC in this location is actually 16 years old. If she was a random woman and met them and fucked them, then its a-ok, not rape or whatever. She happens to be a teacher? RAAAAAAPEEEEEE.

Makes zero sense. Either someone is mentally incapable and is a victim or someone is mentally capable and not a victim.

This would be like making it rape for a boss to have sex with an employee if the employee is 16-17. There is no law like that, though.

[–]Nude-eh -2 points-1 points0 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

coercive sex of a minor who is incapable of making the decision to have sex (even for their first time) is another different crime.

Hmm. All sex which is considered coercive falls under the heading of rape. Coercive sex of an adult is considered rape. If the sex is coercive enough to be considered as such, that is.

Such things of 'coercive sex' which are considered rape are "applying drugs, use or threat of force, blackmail".

Other things which are considered coercive but do not quality for rape are "lying about being in love, emotional manipulation, etc".

Those are not considered rape. But they are considered coercive sex. And the age of consent law targets these possible coercive behaviors as reason for AoC's existence.

Except... many teens do this to each other all the time. And the liberals would suggest that "they're the same age and its natural so its not wrong, not like an adult and teen". They suggest that coercive sex without a 'power imbalance' is fine, but coercive sex with a power imbalance is wrong. Or that a power imbalance inherently is a coercive relationship. Or that any sex where one is older is inherently a coercive sexual experience because of the supposed or possibly real 'power imbalance'.

So AoC law presupposes that A: A person of different age has a power imbalance and B: The sex must be coercive in some form.

Because without both of them, you could not, in any good conscience, suggest an adult be imprisoned for sex with a teen and then claim it a travesty when a teen has sex with a teen and is imprisoned. Knowing the rates of coercive sexual relations among teens, and pointing to that as proof like "well if teens can coerce each other, then it must be even easier for adults, and that's why its illegal" is a red herring to distract from the fact that if we allow teens to have sex with teens, we're allowing the potential for coercion and abuse with no legal recourse.

Thus it turns out AoC law is not meant to actually protect teens from coercive sex, but to punish people who are of a different age for the presumption of coercive sex rather than the actual act of it.

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

Even drugs is a slippery slope. Booze is a drug, and if I give a girl a few beers and we screw, is it coercion?

Lying to get sex is hard to figure out. It sounds like it could be considered as rape by feminists. You get sex under false pretexts, so there was no real consent so it could be called rape.

The only time that there is no power imbalance is when the power is totally equal, which never happens in reality. So, on that level, all sex is rape. Even man and wife is rape, under this sort of definition.

The age thing is weird because, as I said before, there were kids who were 15, or 16 and fucking away while I was still a monk. So, you can't really tell who is mature sexually or otherwise, by their age. But, the legal profession needs some clear number to work as a cut-off, so 12 it is for the Vatican.

Another thing is how girls who hit puberty like to test out their new found sexiness, so they are not that innocent either.

At the rate we are going, we are going to end up like the Muslims in Saudi Arabia, where women have to be covered and shapparoned at all times and the sight of bare calf will drive men crazy with lust.

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

Even drugs is a slippery slope. Booze is a drug, and if I give a girl a few beers and we screw, is it coercion?

Thats something I've recently talked about. Everyone thinks that if she's on quaaludes or on ecstasy, that's rape if you both fuck.

Yes, both are compromising states of mind. Yet women go to places in their 20's to take X and fuck.

http://photo.rukes.com/edc08/slides/edc08%20026.jpg

https://i2.wp.com/fashiotopia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Rave-Outfits-25.jpg?w=541&h=828&crop&ssl=1

https://assets.rbl.ms/10572251/980x.jpg

Yeah, yeah, Not All Ravers/Women, etc. But doing drugs and fucking is a draw for a significant minority. However its still mostly like Tinder. The Women there select. Not the guys.

But everyone would agree that if caught, a man fucking a woman high on X would be a rapist, because of the way the drug screws with your inhibitions or decision making.

Same for quaaludes.

But alcohol? Despite it damaging the PFC's working ability (exectuive function, so called, the decision making place), despite it doing all the exact same fucking things to people's minds that other 'hardcore' drugs do, nah, you're still responsible 100% if you're a little tipsy and fuck someone.

I'm not saying that we should view it all as rape, but there's a significant amount of hypocrisy of people calling it rape for some drugs but not for alcohol, because alcohol is a cultural norm, and therefore there's a certain amount of, as Nietzsche would say, contempt for the familiar. Contempt in this sense means no longer critically looking at it, ignoring it or not taking it seriously.

I know that ciolleges, feminist orgs, etc, have been pushing the "if she's drunk its rape" narrative, and on this count they are actually entirely non-hpyocritical compared to the general public. If you compromise someone'sbrain or they do it themselves, whether its cocaine, alcohol, or X, the effect is the same; compromise.

So why, why on earth do we call it rape for those other drugs but not rape for alcohol.

Oh, and then of course there's the black hookers who were doing cocaine with pretty boy Jared Leto in Lord of War but no one called that a rape scene, for some odd reason. Just a tangent of how even cultural norms depend on whether people are viewed as victims or not. Im actually surprised there wasn't more outrage over that movie of white guys going to africa and exploiting coked up black women sexually.

If someone who is under 18, but is legally capable of consenting to sex, gets drunk with you, and you fuck them, then you're still guilty of statutory rape or some variant of it by 'coercive application of drugs for sex with minor', or something.

Apparently minors deserve special protections adults shouldn't have when it comes to alcohol?

The problem is that laws, philosophies, ideologies, surrounding how we should be culturally are all patchworked together. Its like how the U.S. has 50 states, and the age of consent varies in all of them. In some states, you can marry younger than you can fuck. In others, the AoC might be high, but you can marry someone as young as 12 and the AoC is also suspended. Every state is a mix-n-match of these three things, marry age, AoC, and whether AoC is suspended due to marriage. Frankly, Im surprised those laws still exist given the hatred of pedophiles or 'pedophiles' these days. But I imagine the influx of people of a certain religion may cause a scandal that'll remove those laws soon enough. Especially with all the polygamy involved in that religion. And Im not talking Utah.

At the rate we are going, we are going to end up like the Muslims in Saudi Arabia, where women have to be covered and shapparoned at all times and the sight of bare calf will drive men crazy with lust.

Not so sure about that, but a backlash is coming. There's always a cultural swing. Sometimes its a sex swing.

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

Thanks for writing all this out. You seem to have thought about this problem more than I have, and it was interesting to read your opinions. I really don't think that we should apply the word "rape" to an act between 2 consenting parties, even if one of them is "young" up to some point where most people can agree. And I especially don't think that teachers should be run up the flagpole every time they fuck a student, because realistically who else do they meet?

I think that the French law system where they try to organize their laws into some sort of a logical system has some advantages over the hodgepodge English case law system. We need a bit of rationality.

Sex is weird, Drugs are weird, Young people are weird....The law is weird. So many confusing things mean that we are looking forward to a weird and screwed-up world in the future.