I agree, although I am for abolishing the age of consent entirely, not merely holding it where it is (which it itself elevated from where it used to be, in most jurisdictions). The idea that there is some magical number that transforms rape one day into consent the next is absurd. The whole concept is corrupt and must be tossed out.
Like rape laws, I don’t think age of consent laws originate with feminism, but rather with the idea that some humans (women and children) traditionally have been viewed as property. But as is so often the case, feminism has found these traditionally conservative limitations to be of use by simply inverting the reason to focus on supposed victims. Having consensual and harmless sex with someone under an arbitrary age therefore isn’t a defilement of someone’s property, but some vague offence against the person themselves, and their “innocence” or “honor”.
It is all part of the feminist worldview, which sees all things male, masculine, and therefore sexual, as part of a mysterious and evil patriarchy. In reality, sex is something that men are plainly evolved to want more than women, but when men get it, for that feeling of joy, community, love, intimacy, then women’s power is reduced. You see it in the sex scandals plaguing Hollywood. Men are required to seek sex partners and mates as far as possible away from their daily lives, totally unnatural to human nature (even for women, as schoolteachers show us). A man can’t even ask permission to simply watch him jerk off, without it being cause to lose his career.
Where this becomes most clear is when all parties to the sex are underage (just as if both were drunk). When a mix of sexes are involved, the boy’s life is ruined, and the girl becomes a triumphant victim, even if she was an enthusiastic participant. It becomes a game, where all the moves available to boys amount to cheating, to protect girls’ supposed honor.
There are common principles behind men’s rights, anti-feminism, youth sexuality, the sexuality of the disabled, senior sexuality, and the rights of sexual minorities including gay people and kind people. One of those principles is that sex isn’t bad or dishonorable. There is no virginity to protect, but rather there is intimacy and joy to be shared. It’s simple humanity, and every person, at every time, is entitled to it. Another principle is that facts actually do matter. And the facts show that there is no reason for any arbitrary limitation on sex, based on age. Rather, as common sense would lead us, we simply need to outlaw the behavior none of us would want as adults, which is to say: harm. People who had positive sexual experiences in their youth grow into healthy adults. Harm is what has lasting negative effects. Harm is something feminists don’t understand, which is why you’ll find them in vigorous support of the ritual cutting of baby boys, but it is generally MRAs and kind people who oppose this harm.
Not only that, but the importation of feminist ways of (un)thinking is corrosive and toxic to any philosophy of men’s rights. The idea that boys are somehow victims of the sex they sought out, enjoyed, and bragged about to their friends, is a complete betrayal of those boys, who are then run through a feminist system telling them that what they know about their own selves is false, and always leaving them with the guilt of having resulted in the destruction of someone’s career, or indeed their life itself. It’s the easy siren song of equality, the #metoo-ing of men’s rights, copying rather than comparing all things feminist. Liberty and facts must always come before equality. Being equally poor and equally caged helps nobody.
Last, the age of consent laws are a strong prohibition on speech, something the feminists love, because it frees them from the responsibility of having to prove anything. It’s extraordinarily difficult to provide direct counterexamples to claims of harm, when the evidence itself is criminal. Instead of the strong, instant emotional impact of seeing two people so in love, so enjoying each other completely harmlessly, we are left with dry scientific studies that nobody will bother to read.
Anyway, to conclude, it is the connection between sexuality and masculinity that makes both unacceptable to feminists. We must defend both, even when many MRAs imagine themselves somehow separate from kind people. It’s the same attack, with the same weapons.
No True MRA, Holocaust21 1 Comments
[11/17/2017 3:25:55 AM]
Fundie Index: 4