Men’s Rights Classix: The Age of Consent is Misandry
If it weren't for this guy, there would be no pedophiles.
Today, a trip down memory lane to revisit an until-recently lost classic of modern misogyny: Jay Hammers’ “The Age of Consent is Misandry.” The piece, originally published on Jay Hammers’Men’s Rights blog, inspired some heated discussions amongst MRAs online, with some harshly criticizing the piece as an apologia for pedophilia and others hailing it as a “politically incorrect” masterpiece. Stung by the criticism, Hammers ultimately took his blog down. But the piece has since been resurrected on the Human-Stupidity blog – another blog that seems rather unhealthily obsessed with the supposed injustice of men not being allowed to fuck underage girls.
Here are some of its highlights (that is, lowlights); the headlines are mine.
ALL ABOUT THE MENZ
The arbitrary age of consent is not about protecting women/girls. It is about valuing females and their virtue over males and their freedom. The intent of the laws is to stop older men from having sex with younger women and that is how it is enforced. It was never intended to stop younger men from having sex with older women.
MORE BETA BLUES
Age of consent laws are designed to punish beta males. A beta male in his 20s, unsuccessful with women his own age who are infused with a sense of feminist entitlement and deride all but the top alpha males who take interest in them, who seeks companionship with a younger, sexually mature female who desires him, should not go to prison for acting on that which is normal male sexuality.
FEMINISTS WHO SUPPORT AGE OF CONSENT LAWS ARE TREATING WOMEN LIKE CHILDREN
If we are to treat women as children then we should be consistent. Young women who have sex with older men are as much victims as women who have sex with a pick-up artist after meeting at a club. In both cases, feminists are angry because the woman has been “fooled” into having sex with a less than ideal mate in terms of value. …
This is what makes feminists angry and this is why age of consent exists still today, because it is assumed women are not mentally mature enough to give consent AND because older women want to limit men’s options to increase their own value in the sexual marketplace.
BUT WOMEN ARE CHILDREN, BASICALLY
Older women … are generally not of a much higher intelligence level than teenage girls. The big difference between the two is that older women are less attractive and that is what makes them so damn angry. …
Females generally do not significantly mature mentally past puberty so it should always be illegal for any woman to have sex or it should never be illegal for any woman to have sex. There is no arbitrary age where females suddenly become self-aware, realizing the consequences of their actions, and stop seeking out alpha males. Thus there must not be an arbitrary age of consent for sex.
A MODEST PROPOSAL
If anything, it should be illegal for women to have sex with men until men have been educated on the truths of women, Marriage 2.0, Game, feminism, and men’s rights.
Discuss?
Posted on June 18, 2011, in alpha males, antifeminism, beta males, creepy, internal debate, misandry, misogyny, MRA, PUA, rapey. Bookmark the permalink. 890 Comments.
Sebastian Steele’s head is too small for his body. Or rather, his body is too muscular for the size of his head. Not attractive at all, at least to me.
I’ll bet Jay Hammer is one of those guys who would get very very upset if you were to imply he was a creep for hitting on teenage girls.
Age of consent laws are meant to protect children, and even he recognizes that. He realizes that in order to invalidate the law he needs to show that children don’t need special protection. He does this by arguing that women do not mature past puberty and are therefore the same as children (Where does that leave teenage boys?) Misogyny is this argument’s keystone.
Also, there are numerous studies about children’s maturation past puberty. These studies support not only age of consent laws, but emancipation laws, juvenile delinquency laws, drinking laws, smoking laws, and a host of other laws that limit children’s rights. The age of all of these laws will always be arbitrary, because bright lines are always arbitrary. The bright line is arbitrary but easier to implement and enforce, and ultimately fairer for that reason. Most studies show that the brain does not actually fully mature until 25, but 25 is obviously a socially impractical line.
Is a 16 year old girl mature enough to love a 16 year old boy?
Is a 16 year old boy mature enough to love a 16 year old girl?
Is a 16 year old girl mature enough to love a 30 year old man?
Is a 30 year old man mature enough to love a 16 year old girl?
Does the State have the power to dictate who can love whom?
Will the State incarcerate a 16 year old girl’s lover if he is 30 years old?
(TW for rape apologism) Wow, I just looked through some of the other things on the Human Stupidity Blog, and the WHOLE THING is about rape apologism, like saying rape is equivalent to being “force-fed disgusting items” or “dunked in a toilet.” Oh, and that rape ain’t all that bad because rape victims can still get married. Talk about a complete lack of empathy. It’s nauseating.
Slavey, is a 3 year old boy mature enough to have sex with a 30 year old woman? Obviously the line has to be somewhere. Also it is not about love, they are free to love who they wish. It is about sex. The state has a right to limit who has sex with who only so far as it has a compelling interest to do so. In this case the compelling interest is its protection of children.
As far as 16 year olds and 16 year olds, they are not mature enough for sex, but as both are underage no crime is committed. Neither is old enough and therefore neither is abusing power.
Sandy, don’t make the mistake of engaging with NWOSub as if he’s arguing in good faith. He’s not. He’ll take anything you say and twist it around so it means the opposite of what you said. He’ll make counterfactual claims and ignore requests for evidence. He’ll contradict himself within the space of 20 minutes. And he will lie through his teeth as long as it’s convenient for him. He’s one of the most dishonest trolls around.
“Females generally do not significantly mature mentally past puberty so it should always be illegal for any woman to have sex or it should never be illegal for any woman to have sex. There is no arbitrary age where females suddenly become self-aware, realizing the consequences of their actions, and stop seeking out alpha males. Thus there must not be an arbitrary age of consent for sex.”
Dear god. There are people who actually believe that?
I do agree that the age of consent is SOMEWHAT arbitrary, because individuals mature at different rates. Should it be fifteen? Sixteen? Seventeen? I don’t really know.
But I do think having that having an age of consent is important. Why? Because people DO learn and mature as they get older. I think it’s much easier for a 15-year-old of either gender to be manipulated and taken advantage of by a 30-year-old of either gender then it is for a 30-year-old to take advantage of a 30-year-old*.
*I am aware that I’m making huge generalizations here. But I think they hold true enough.
@Sandy…Beautiful rebuttal, comparing a 3 year to the same level of sexual maturity as a 16 year old.
How is it not about love? If two people, a 30 year old man and a 16 year old woman say they love each other, why is it untrue?
As always you revert to the feminist power dynamic.
If a year 30 old man loves a 16 year old woman, he’s not thinking about some foolish power dynamic. Theres no alterior motive. Once again we see the true nature of the feminist hate movement. A man’s love is evil and controlling, it’s all about power. Is that the way women think about love? Is it all about power to you?
I guess Sally is right. The point is not that a 3 year old is the same as a 16 year old, the point is a 3 year old obviously is not. It is obviously not ok to have sex with a 3 year old. A 16 year old is less clear. The line needs to be somewhere.
It is not about love because it is not illegal for a 30 year old and a 16 year old to say they love each other. They just cannot have sex.
Actually in Canada and a lot of US states, 16 is the age of consent (for both male and female obv xD) and/or there are age gap exceptions, so kids in HS aren’t going to be arrested for having younger b/fs or g/fs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_North_America#United_States
age of consent 16 (31): Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia
Interestingly, some areas still have old sodomy laws on the books that haven’t been scrapped or altered (like Canada, even tho it’s never enforced and most police dun even know about it xD ) so the age of consent for anal sex (for either gender) is 18, while all other sex acts is 16 xD
I generally do think 16 or 17 y/os are mature enuf to understand sex (it would be helpful if we as a society weren’t so scared of honestly talking about it) and to control their own bodies. This includes other non-sexual things involving one’s own body as well. But I’m open to arguments otherwise. :] But I think our society needs to sit down and figure out when we think people are old enuf to be able to have informed consent about things. -_-;; I generally think our various age laws are ridic and hilariously inconsistent. xD 16 is old enuf to drive, but not to vote. And when you can vote, you can’t drink or smoke. Or you can smoke, but you can’t drink. Or you can drink, but you can’t smoke. Back when Canada’s age of consent was 14, I always found it ridic that we don’t allow ppl to view child porn, but you can sleep w/ the child. I guess just w/ the lights off -_-;;
As for abovepants. I’ve heard the “women never mature past 13 so therefore all girls should be game!” thing -_-;; Nice weaselly way to say “I wanna F kids, but I dun want my son to have sex until he’s 18″ -_-;;; I’m shocked that those supporters dun hold me up as an example of proof tho xDDD It’d be hilarious XD
Speaking of people loving each other as opposed to having sex with each other… I had a friend who is my age who in his mid 20s started dating a girl who was 16. Their plan was to wait until she was 18 to actually have sex, due to the age of consent laws in their state. Funnily enough, this didn’t work out too well. As far as I know they did actually manage to refrain from having sex. But she went off to college, hooked up with some boys her own age, and dumped him.
@Plymouth the feminist conspiracy got to her! :O
NWO, your own ephebophilia is fairly obvious. So perhaps you can answer a question for me. Assume for a moment that the age of consent laws are not a feminist conspiracy designed to keep you from obtaining an ideal, fifteen year old, virgin bride whose father knows you’re the best choice for her, and whose lack of experience assures your insecure ass that she will never leave you.
Just for shits and giggles, assume that the age of consent laws have changed and evolved as our society/culture has changed and involved. Assume that our increased longevity and greater understanding of human brain development has allowed us to reconsider that teenagers should be married and parents even though they are physically capable. Assume, just for a moment, that age of consent laws also reflect the preferences of parents who are legally responsible, in most jurisdictions, for their off spring until the age of eighteen.
Now tell me: what is the appreciable difference between a sixteen year old girl who has yet to finish high school and an eighteen year old?
“But I do think having that having an age of consent is important. Why? Because people DO learn and mature as they get older. I think it’s much easier for a 15-year-old of either gender to be manipulated and taken advantage of by a 30-year-old of either gender then it is for a 30-year-old to take advantage of a 30-year-old*.
*I am aware that I’m making huge generalizations here. But I think they hold true enough.”
In the interest of making huge generalizations, I want to mention that the ease of manipulation is one of the major reasons I am a fan of age of consent laws. When you compare a 30 year old and 16 year old, the 30 year old (regardless of gender) is more likely to have institutional power. Maybe most 16 year olds are more savvy than I was at that age, but 30 year olds were part of that group I labeled “adult” which made them authority figures. I’m sure some of my teachers were in that age range, and friends of my parents.
That authority (assumed or concrete) could make a sexual relationship dangerously unfair. I was be more willing to trust an adult to tell me what was right and wrong. I assume current 16 year olds might share some of that susceptibility to manipulation.
NWOS
In answer to your questions:
Sometimes
Sometimes
Sometimes
Sometimes
Yes -states quite clearly have done, and still do; whilst they can’t legislate people’s feelings, they can sure as hell make expressions of those feelings punishable by death or incarceration, or allow a culture of impunity in which loving across an arbitrary racial or religious divide has publically injurious or fatal consequences.
I don’t know about the US, but I guess it varies from state to state; here in the UK/Europe – no, as the age of consent is usually 16, and “statutory rape” doesn’t apply.
Just in case ppl got the wrong impression btw, the above example about the ridiculosity of the inconsistancy of Canada’s laws when the age of consent was 14 was not that I thought child porn laws should go down to 14 to match -_- (I realize this is a sensitive and possibly personal or triggering topic for some, so I’m just noting that :\ )
@Nobinayamu
Your first assumption, that of longevity, is incorrect. You can google anything you like but those numbers will be false. This can easily be seen, Ben Franklin, 83, A Jackson, 78, G. Washington 67, pheumonia at yorktown, T Jefferson, 83, ect. all without the miracle of modern medicine. People live shorter lives today than long ago. You’ve been lied to.
As to your question…”what is the appreciable difference between a sixteen year old girl who has yet to finish high school and an eighteen year old?”
The answer is nothing at all, of course. The same difference that there is between a 30 year old man and a 16 year old woman. It’s just a number.
As I said, if a 30 year old man loves a woman who is 16; the thought of power over her never crosses his mind. In fact, He loves her and wanting any harm to come to her is the furthest thing from his mind. As per your feminist doctrine a man’s love is reviled and must be viewed in terms of power and control.
@Plymouth…” But she went off to college, hooked up with some boys her own age, and dumped him.”
You forgot to mention she could do so much better than that loser. How nice of you to treat this man, who was willing to “wait for her,” as a disposable piece of garbage to be “dumped.” I wonder how “he” felt about be dumped? I guess he was disappointed at losing the power and control he had over her. Or maybe he was devastated, buy really, who cares. Certainly not you. I guess you could’ve said she was pretty cold to “dump” him after he waited, but nah. He’s just a man.
Hatred in, Hatred out.
Ami: I actually support the age of consent for sex being lower than the age of consent to star in porn, because porn has all the issues of emotional readiness that exist in sex, plus bonus other issues (the risk of slut-shaming, reinforcing the transactional model of sexuality, the way it limits the porn star’s career options afterward, etc.). Not to mention the risk that teenagers would be pressured into porn to earn money for their parents and not be good at saying “no”…
But yeah. I had my first sexual fantasies at 7 or 8 (yes, really) and I was not fucking ready for sex at 13. I figure most people aren’t.
NWOSlave, do you accept that abusive relationships exist?
Also, yes, people are allowed to leave relationships. Duh?
See? Subby just LOVES making things up. He knows for a damn fact that the last thing on the mind of a 30-year-old man who’s pursuing a 16-year-old girl is control, power and domination. How does he know that? DON’T FUCKING ASK, asking Subby for evidence for his generalizations is PURE OPPRESSION AND HATRED DAMMIT. It’s true because he said it’s true, that’s all you bitches need to know.
He’s nothing but a rank liar.
More lying by Subby. Observe his utter contempt for what we commonly recognize as empirically verifiable facts and reality.
NWO, I realize that you don’t understand much about how numbers, trends, statistics, etc., work. Let me help you out: on average, longevity in the human species. My grandmother is 90 years old and could easily live to be 95 or 100. Knock wood. One of our dearest family friends and a surrogate grandfather to me and my sisters recently celebrated his 100th birthday. Is this standard? Is this average? Outliers, even outliers like Ben Franklin are not standard. Otherwise men like you wouldn’t point out that men, on average, have shorter life spans than women and use this as spurious support to your claims of female privilege. Right? I mean, if I personally know a man who is 100 then clearly men live longer than women because one of my grandmothers died at 63.
Moving on – we aren’t talking about love. We’re talking about age of consent which is lower than 18 in most states across the U.S. and lower than 16, in several. We are discussing the laws, which are made on a state by state, basis around the age at which a young person (age of consent laws apply to boys as well as girls) can consent to sexual activity. The laws can be arbitrary, true. But since the vast majority of them were put in place long before feminism, it’s a complete stretch of your fevered persecution complex to believe that feminists have anything to do with them.
If a thirty year old man’s love for a 14 or 15 or 16 year old girl (differing by state, of course) is so “pure” then he should have no problem waiting for her to reach the age of consent before beginning a sexual relationship with her.
So, again, what is the appreciable difference a sixteen year old and an eighteen year old?
And if the 30 + year old men who seek to form romantic relationships with teenagers are so noble of intent then what exactly is the problem with the age of consent?
@SallyStrange…Show me YOUR evidence that a mans love is about power and control. Because that is exactly what you’re saying.
If there’s no difference between a sixteen year old and an eighteen year old, then a 30 year old man should have no problem waiting 2 years.
Also, that sentence should read “on average, longevity in the human species has increased.”
@Nobinayamu… “If a thirty year old man’s love for a 14 or 15 or 16 year old girl (differing by state, of course) is so “pure” then he should have no problem waiting for her to reach the age of consent before beginning a sexual relationship with her.”
The real question is WHY should he wait? Because……….?
No. I’m not answering your question until you answer one of mine.
You’ve skipped right over trying to defend your erroneous claims about human longevity, which I appreciate. And I’m happy to engage you and any other posters in the practical reasons for age of consent laws.
But since you’re conveniently ignoring the fact that age of consent laws apply specifically to sex and not love, I’ll ask again: if the love that a man who is over 30 feels for a 14 or 15 year old is so “pure,” why can’t he wait until she has reached the age of consent to begin a sexual relationship with her?
Few women–of whatever chronological age–have the mentality, good judgement, or capacity for self-responsibility over that of a ten or eleven year old anyway–(see sundry “slut walks” that they,along with their feminist spokesmen, promote in otherwise more or less decent cities) and their posts here in manboobz.com for example, and you will find that the entire notion of “age-of-consent” for the females of any age is rather problematic. Access to, and responsibility for, female sexual activity should be on the man who has responsibility for her well being, who will be responsible for her support, and the support of any children from the union, and who undertakes to protect her, shelter her, and guide her.
It is quite possible that such patriarchy (if undertaken by fathers) ,or marriage (if undertaken by husbands) keeping their nearest and dearest under careful supervision, and away from unwanted or dangerous males, would solve the many embarassing problems associated with child-abuse, rape, or sex harassment resulting from too much freedom for too many women!
Just a thought, but I haven’t read anyting better.
PEACE AND FREEDOM!
David K. Meller
Because having sex before you’re emotionally ready for sex can cause emotional damage to both men and women.
So, David K. Meller, just to be clear, you’re advocating that there is no appreciable difference between an 11 year old girl and 18 year old woman. Because you deem both to be irresponsible, it’s fine for an adult man to have sex with either?
If this isn’t your position, please clarify.
Sandy, don’t make the mistake of engaging with NWOSub as if he’s arguing in good faith. He’s not. He’ll take anything you say and twist it around so it means the opposite of what you said. He’ll make counterfactual claims and ignore requests for evidence. He’ll contradict himself within the space of 20 minutes. And he will lie through his teeth as long as it’s convenient for him. He’s one of the most dishonest trolls around.
Oh. My. God.
NWOSlave is Sarah Palin!
@Nobinayamu…Ok the answer is simply there is no reason to wait. If they love each other and want to have sex they should. Now your answer?
David: I have had sex with six men. About six hundred people have seen me naked (two hundred of them in person).
I have never been raped.
You know why? BECAUSE WHAT CAUSES RAPE IS THE PRESENCE OF A MOTHERFUCKING RAPIST.
No, NWO. You did not answer my question; you answered your question.
My question is this: if a man who is 30+ years old falls in love with a 14 or 15 year old girl and in the state they live in the age of consent is 16, why can’t he wait until she is 16 to begin a sexual relationship with her?
His love is pure, right? Why can’t he wait?
David
That’s a pretty accurate description of how things work in Saudi Arabia, where all women are under the guardianship of a male relative, or spouse. Perhaps you should consider moving there….
“Few women–of whatever chronological age–have the mentality, good judgement, or capacity for self-responsibility over that of a ten or eleven year old anyway”
Wow, really? Could I see some empirical data reflecting that, something in the way of unbiased conclusions drawn from definitive research in the field of neuroscience to back that up? That would be great! Thanks.
Also, are you suggesting that the age of consent for sexual intercourse might as well be around eleven years of age? I just find that strange, since many ten and eleven year olds are not even physically mature enough at that age for sex, regardless of your belief that they are as psychologically mature as they are going to get.
Again you’ve been lied to about longevity. Go back in time to any culture. Minamoto no Yorimasa, 1106-1180. 74 years old. Your life expectancy is shorter. But your indoctrination won’t allow independent thought. The average age of a persons life 500 years ago, barring an unnatural death was longer. You can’t accept this because you’ve been told over and over again you’re better off today. Tell a lie and tell it often and the masses will believe.
@Nobinayamu…I really can’t answer it any clearer.
No, NWO. I am a realist who believes in science and medicine. You’re an idiot and I’m not going to take your word for it because your read all about on some site that probably denies the holocaust.
The average life expectancy, disease and unnatural death not withstanding, has risen. Period. I’m not going to argue this point with your dumb ass. Unless, you will concede that men live longer than women because I know a man who is 100 years old and one of my grandmothers died at 63.
Do you concede?
You mean you won’t answer it.
Oh, look, you really can’t stop yourself from lying, can you? Because I emphatically did not say that. I simply noted that you made an un-evidenced generalization, that NO older men have power control and domination on their minds when they pursue teenaged girls. If I were going to make a statement about it, I’d say that some do and some don’t, because I’m not an idiot who likes to make things up, like you.
Fucking typos,”…to take your word for because you read all about it on some site that probably denies the holocaust.”
“The average age of a persons life 500 years ago, barring an unnatural death was longer.”
Would you care to provide any census data to support your claim, or would you prefer to reference a handful of people from different time periods to prove that since they were able to live for so long, nearly everyone else was too?
Hmm. My male pet tarantula lived to be eleven years old, even though I had read that they normally only live to be about seven. By that logic, apparently I and all other tarantula owners have been lied to and most (if not all) male tarantulas really have a longer life span!
See, I can make an exception-proves-the-rule logical fallacy, too =D
@Nobinayamu…Science and medicine is a farce. Look at the ancient ruins dug up. For starters, for the most part they all had all there teeth unless knocked out due to an unfortunate accident, cavities where unheard of. Today your fed the very things that produce cavities, then science and medicine offer the cure.
My job takes me all over, and I fly very often. I walk thru the radiation machines for MY security against the never anding war against terrorism. I’m being irradiated, for MY security. They’re killing me for MY safety.
@ NWO
If science and medicine are a farce, can I convince you never to get vaccinated and never to go to the doctor or emergency room?
Thx!
Science and medicine are a farce because more human diets contain processed sugar and, as a result, more people experience tooth decay?
Are you really this stupid? Don’t answer. You are really this stupid and you prove it on this and other sites on a nearly daily basis.
NWO, opt for the pat down. Many people who are concerned about the back-scatter radiation from the machines opt for the pat down. I am against the security theater of modern flying, but no one is trying to kill you and you can opt for the pat down.
I never do tawaen, and at my age I’m far healthier than most people half my age.
NWOS
When yousay that longevity was longer 500 years ago barring unnatural death, could you please explain what you mean by unnatural death in this context, as it seems to me that you simply want to ignore the fact that throughout history VERY large numbers of people, you know, died, at a young age from entirely natural causes, as opposed to today, when VERY large numbers of people die from natural causes at a much, much older age.
I do opt for the pat down Nobinayamu, I’m a fucking regular and they hate it when they see me coming. But when I’m running late I have no choice but to be irradiated. Which I’m sure makes you very happy.
Dan unnatural would be disease/accident. Obviosly if a plague sweeps thru an area for those years the “average” life span would plummet. Does this mean the “average” life span was lower? If war comes and a certain country is devastated, again those years will show a huge drop in life expectancy. Of course it gives a false reading. I mean are we going to say 1940-45 europe were bad years for life expectancy? Boy people really didn’t live long back in those days. But that IS the stats they give you as proof.
First of all, don’t run late. Something my father taught me “If you’re running late it’s because you didn’t leave early enough.”
Secondly, I take no delight in you’re being irradiated. Just because you’re stupid doesn’t mean that I wish you physical harm.
See? NWOSub is proudly proclaiming his contempt for the entire concept of independently verifiable facts. He thinks science and medicine are a farce. There’s no point talking to him, unless you want to mock him. Yes, he is a lot like Sarah Palin. She is, after all, a creationist, and like creationists, NWOSub is unable to distinguish between his feelings and objective facts. He thinks they are the same thing, which is why he just says things like, “Life expectency now is shorter than before” and “Older men who pursue teenage girls NEVER have domination and control on their minds.” He just makes it up, and it’s true for him because it FEELS true. It’s Colbert’s truthiness in a nutshell.
Argh. I must be dehydrated. “…no delight in your being irradiated.”
NWOSlave – What hatred? I did mention this was a FRIEND of mine. I think he’s a good guy. I think he was a little silly to try to date a 16 year old at his age, but, whatever, I’ve done some silly things in my day – I dated a 19 year old at age 25 briefly. That was also a bad idea even though no age-of-consent laws were impacted. We were just at different life stages and it didn’t work out, same as my friend and his high school girlfriend. We just lost touch, nothing happened to make the friendship blow up. “Dumped” is an expression for breaking up with someone in an unceremonious fashion. From what I heard of what happened I think it applies. He was pretty heartbroken. I knew better than to say “I told you so” because it wouldn’t have helped anything. Relationships between people with significant age disparity sometimes work out but more often than not they don’t.
NWOslave doesn’t bother me as much because he’s so obviously out there, but David K. Meller’s attempt to sound “reasonable” while spouting the most vile misogynistic bullshit makes me want to kick him in the balls, which is an unreasonable reaction to his unreasonable statement.
The reasonable thing to do is try to approach him with reason.
So David, let’s pretend that your infantilization of women bore any semblance to human reality…
Other than the major issue here with your assumption that we need Teh Menz protection from other men in the first place, the second worse assumption you’re making here is that dangerous men don’t become fathers and husbands. In your Bizarro world where there aren’t any age of consent laws, just the guidance of husbands and fathers, where is the protection for the daughters – and I’m using that word deliberately, as the homophobia in much of the MRM would likely protect sons through laws labeling adult men who prey on male children as homosexuals, and homosexuality would be illegal considering that homophobia has much of its roots in misogyny and the patriarchy – where is the protection for the daughters being molested by their fathers?
You might argue that the protection would be through anti-incest laws, but pedophiles are creative. The same way they share tips and child pornography, they would skirt anti-incest laws by sharing their children. Without age of consent laws, where would the protection be?
I’d ask about the protection of wives who are raped by their husbands, but I suspect you, like many of your disgusting ilk, are the type who argues that rape within marriage isn’t possible, that upon getting married, a woman surrenders all personal autonomy to her husband.
The logical outcome of David’s views is the enslavement of all women. Since they are as children, they must be cared for as children. They can’t vote, they can’t own property, they can’t go to college or have a career, they certainly can’t run for office, they can’t start their own businesses, etc.
You know, just like in the good old days. And that was the exact same reasoning used to justify treating women as chattel then, too. And it was the same reasoning used to justify treating black people like chattel.
A quick aside: his pseudo-intellectualism and pretentious prose aside… I kind of like Meller. His a misogynistic racist and makes no bones about it. I deplore his beliefs and disagree vehemently. But I respect his honesty.
That said, Tabby Lavalamp, your points are all good ones.
Basically all those things you are saying I “forgot to mention” are things I DON’T ACTUALLY THINK. Based on what you’re ASSUMING I think you’re accusing me of hatred I don’t feel. Stop putting words in people’s mouths. The hatred is all in your head.
SallyStrange….Ahhh a creationist.
Quick question, which you won’t/can’t answer.
Have you ever seen the DNA graphs with all the little dots to show your lineage center of distribution?
Now if you count those little dots they average about 250.
You will have one more than your mother as will I.
These dots/generations are transferred thru the mother genes.
Now since there is an average of 250 dots/generations equalling 5000 years. And there are 4 genetic distinctions. Why does (science) discount this?
So if you trace your lineage down thru the generations everyone alive came from 4 pairs of ancestors precisely 5000 years ago. Science bears this out. It is incontrovertable.
Why do you care what science does or doesn’t bear out, NWOSub? You already said it was a farce. Yet now you’re making an appeal to scientific credibility (incoherently of course since you don’t even understand what you’re saying).
See? He contradicts himself within the space of 20 minutes again.
True, Sally, but unlike so many other MRA’s, Meller isn’t trying to pretend otherwise. The man has problems with the 14th amendment for heaven’s sake. He genuinely believes women and ethnic minorities are inferior to White men and doesn’t try to pretty it up with bullshit avuncularity or faux concern.
He believes that women should be property, or at least considered so legally, and that ethnic minorities are inferior. He puts it right out there. He isn’t trying to pretend that what he advocates will increase equality. He’s against equality.
SallyStrange…The point is they are lying to you Sally. If as you’ve been indoctrinate in school that we all came from lucy, 200,000 years ago you would have 10,000 of those dots not 250. You’re being lied to. Thats the point.
Sally, NWO has no consistent belief system. If he weren’t so entrenched in his own anti-intellectualism he’d respond to your charges of contradiction by quoting Whitman. Or at least Emerson.
But he can’t have a consistent belief system. If he did then his brain would explode.
NWO, is science a farce or not? If science is a farce then all science is a farce. You shouldn’t even be on a computer right now.
US Life Expectancy, 1850-2004 http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005140.html
More on the subject, including a useful historical chart that looks at estimated average life expectancy over human history and prehistory: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expectancy
Yes, NWO, there were people in the ancient world who lived into their 60s and older. Quite a few, actually. One major cause of the lower life expectancies back then was that infant mortality was much higher than it is today; if you survived infancy there was a good chance that you would live a lot longer than the average life expectancy. But of course if you die as an infant, you’re still dead. Which means that no matter how you slice it, life expectancy has increased drastically in the last 500 years.
EDIT: Reworded a sentence to be more accurate.
Computers aren’t science! Computers are engineering ;)
Could I ask you all to refer to David K. Meller as DKM? Or at least something that is not “David.”
I think I speak for most Davids when I say that we do not want to be associated with Mr. Meller or his ideas.
PEACE AND FREEDOM!!!11!!!
Oh my god, poor, poor Subby! He’s being slowly killed by the gubmint. And why? Because he’s a MAN. Doing a HARD job, like men do. And because he knows he TRUTH. What truth? The truth THEY don’t want you to know. Like how they’re selling his birth certificate on the stock market. Yours too! Why? For PROFIT. Poor, poor Subby.
Of course, despite all this killing of Subby, he’s also healthier than people HALF his age. It appears to be a paradox, but somehow it’s not. Oh, also, life expectancies are the same around the world. TRUFAX! And please ignore historical infant mortality rates — they were made up by the Rockefellers.
I’m glad someone finds David K. Meller refreshing. I find his hatred boring as hell and somewhat nauseating also. But I expect being a small, angry, entitled, deeply stupid person is punishment in itself.
Ah yes, the ever-endearing Women are Children! And also ONLY Women should raise Children! Because of…
I’ve seen the charts before Dave.
If I go by these numbers without knowing anything about history I can say that Russian life expectancy 1940-45 was deplorable. “They just didn’t live very long back in those days.” While that statement I just made is “factually” true. It’s also total bullshit.