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?
@Molly Ren 78.8% of welfare recipients are women. The majority of people out of work are men. 80% of the homeless are men. I could go on but I think you get the point.
@Molly Ren No. It’s because feminists do *not* have brains. It’s the equivalent of what feminists always complain about with men and rape jokes. As people without brains, you don’t understand what it would actually feel like to have one wrapped around something. Therefore you have no right to say those words. Check your privilege.
NWO: I think sex is lots of things. Sometimes (unhealthy times) there is a power dynamic used in getting/maintaining a sexual relationship (see Roissey/PUA sites/John Derbyshire). Sometimes it’s a fun romp. Sometimes it’s deeply moving. Sometimes it’s a quiet expression of love.
The sad (and pathetic) thing is the way you have idealised it, so that it’s, just by virtue of two people rubbing mucous membranes together, “pure wuv”. That’s foolish. It’s counter to all the evidence. Then again you engage in, ‘No true scotsman” arguments about age-gap relationships.
Newsflash: I don’t think all age-gap romances are exploitative. My grandfather was something like 20 years older than my grandmother. My former fiancé was 12 years my junior (I was 32, she was 21, when we started. We broke up ten years later). I do think an older person can exploit/take advantage of the things which come of being older: Experience, money, freedom, mystery.
If my 18 year old girlfriend had wanted sex… I probably have said yes. I’d have been more willing to say yes if she had had a prior sexual partner (because I would have thought she better understood what she was doing). I’d have worked to make sure it was what she wanted. But PIV wasn’t what she wanted, so we didn’t.
Why? Because she has the right to say no.
But you prefer to live in a fantasy world where everything is black and white. I don’t live in that world. I live in one where people are complex. Where older people know more than younger people, and can take advantage of them (that whole, “power dynamic” you deride). Honestly, it makes the world more pleasant to live (and love) in.
@Kirbywarp He’s exploding into straw again xD DO A BARREL ROLL!!!! XD
There was no question kirbywarp.
So the answer is…………………………….
“78.8% of welfare recipients are women. The majority of people out of work are men. 80% of the homeless are men.”
What’s keeping men from accessing information about food stamps?
I admit, I didn’t have a car at the time, and if I didn’t have money saved previously it would have been damn hard to get to take the bus to the welfare office to actually apply. Do fewer men have cars than women? Are they less likely to seek help?
Quick what’s a 33 letter long word for “shut the fuck up Kirby”? xD
NWO: What about “try wrapping your brain around this” = Feminist?
Because I am sure DKM just got insulted that you compared him to a feminist.
@NWO:
You’re right, in that instance, there wasn’t. But your response was not “oh, that fact is very interesting, it certainly does contradict my claim that age of consent laws were put in place by feminists,” it was “the saying, “Try wrapping your brain around this” screams feminist.” In other words, deflecting having to face actual facts by a non sequitur.
If you want to be accurate, just pretend my statement was aimed at every other question in this thread posed by you but not answered, especially every time you make the statement “no one seems to want to answer my questions.”
@Molly Ren… “What’s keeping men from accessing information about food stamps?”
Well 730 billion dollars is already spent on these entitlement programs, which is over 40% of the shrinking amount of money collected by the State. I know money is printed out of thin air, but oddly enough the agreement between the Fed and the State is; the state borrows money on your labor that the fed lends which it doesn’t have. It’s a sweet gig, sorta.
The state borrows money? there is a repayment requirement?
Oh wait… you are just making shit up again. That, or willfully lying.
kirbywarp, I think my ratio of questions I’ve answered-vs-question that were answered is pretty damn good.
@NWO:
No, no it is not. Because “answering a question” isn’t as easy as putting a poster’s name at the beginning of your reply, or even quoting the given question. Answering means giving an actual answer, no deflecting by talking about something else, not posing a question in return, not pussy-footing (sorry, all you lovely pussies out there) around giving your actual views on things, and no dismissing the question because the questioner is, in your view, an evil feminists.
You know, actually engaging opinions/claims/facts that contradict your view.
More women get welfare because more women are caring for children alone–which is why more women need welfare. Being poor enough to qualify for welfare is hardly a privilege.
…And that’s why you shouldn’t fuck teenagers?
Also, no, men don’t (often) use sex to control women. More often, they control women to get sex. Which is the problem with dating teenagers–an adult dating a teenager has too much ability to control them for sex.
(By the way, I thought it was pretty funny the bit where NWO was pretending to be a soft-hearted romantic who just believed in the Power Of Love.)
Holly Pervocracy
“More women get welfare because more women are caring for children alone–which is why more women need welfare. Being poor enough to qualify for welfare is hardly a privilege.
First off those women caring for children out of wedlock have the fathers or boyfriends living with them. Lets cut the crap. Second this doesn’t negate the fact that more men are out of work and the vast majority of homeless are men. Don’t they deserve your charity? My guess is they might see welfare as a privilege.
“Also, no, men don’t (often) use sex to control women. More often, they control women to get sex. Which is the problem with dating teenagers–an adult dating a teenager has too much ability to control them for sex.”
Back to the control dynamic again. It’s so ingrained in your thought process you can’t seem to shake it. If men aren’t (often) using sex to control women they are “more often” using control to “get sex.”
And you’re telling me you haven’t been indoctrinated? Is this how women normally think about sex? Once again men don’t think about sex in any way other than being a pleasurable act. Women either naturally think of sex as a means of control or have been indoctrinated to think that way. I’m hoping it’s the latter.
NWO, with me alone on this thread your ratio of questions asked vs. answered is abysmal.
As for you always being wrong, what can I say? You are wrong so often it’s like you think it’s a sport. Shall I list just a few of the things you’ve been wrong about today:
1) The increased average lifespan of human beings
2) The age of consent being 18, across the board and men regularly going to jail for having sex with women under 18 years of age.
3) The word mammography.
4) The risk of breast cancer from mammograms. MAMMOGRAMS.
5) The idea that most of the posters on this board have no objections to adult women having sex with young teenage boys.
6) The idea that feminists created the age of consent laws
7) The notion that feminists are preventing you from forming romantic relationships with 17 year old girls
8) Your utter lack of reading comprehension. When I say that society has advanced in myriad ways since the days when we married of twelve year olds I didn’t say that it’s changed BECAUSE we’ve stopped marrying off twelve year olds. I mean, really, just dumb as a bag of hammers. Or did we decide rocks? Either way, dumb as shit.
9) The idea that we never married off twelve year olds: http://chnm.gmu.edu/cyh/primary-sources/24
10) Was the Lolita stuff you or that other guy.
And that’s just from this thread. This thread, all by itself.
The pure, natural, totally non-exploitive love that can only occur between a 17-year old girl and a 50-year old man. Makes me go all misty just thinking about it.
David, titty-baby comes from my God-father. He is, any many ways an unpleasant person (thought it must be said that I love him dearly) and yet he is utterly compelling and people love to be around him. Apart from being hilarious and saying things like “titty-baby” his command of tonal language is awesome. Infinite variations on the word “mother-fucker”. You know, like Miles Davis.
But no one, I mean no one, is better with insults Which reminds me, I must remember to call him tomorrow on Father’s Day.
@Nobinayamu Other guy. 😐
If I were getting sex from a starry-eyed teenager who would do anything for my approval, who didn’t have the perspective or nerve to criticize anything I did or disagree with me about anything, and whom I could dump any time she got inconvenient, I’d say “this is nothing but a pleasurable act!” too. I mean, it would sure be simple for ME.
(I mean, if I could live with myself.)
I also find the newly romantic “twuu wuv” NWO a hoot.
NWO, perhaps your inability to understand the range of power dynamics that can exist within romantic relationships is because you don’t have them.
The notion that you are inside the head of any man, other than yourself, let alone every man and woman currently involved in a sexual relationship is – I give up. I’m out of synonyms for “ridiculous” and “absurd”
Not only is the idea of power dynamics within relationships not particularly feminist, it’s not particularly modern I know you don’t read. I’m sure it hurts your brain. But for the love of our sanity, go to a library, pick out novels written in the 40s and 50s -nothing too taxing- that describe love and/or marriage. See what you find.
@NWO:
Also this. This annoying habit of yours to ignore a conversation once you don’t have an answer to it, or you turn out to be wrong. I have the feeling that the only reason you responded to me was because Pecunium didn’t ask a question, so you had an easy response.
People will think no less of you if you openly say “you know? You might be right about this. I’m gonna go think about it.” Even MRAL was mature (=_=) enough to say such things. If you leave it hanging, nobody knows what you think, and in a real conversation its horribly rude to just walk off, even if you just say “you know what? I don’t want to talk about this any more.” Its infinitely worse when someone proves you wrong, you disappear, and a thread or two later you make the exact argument that was refuted before. If you want to actually converse with people, prove it. Otherwise don’t be surprised if we devolv
Oh my dear sweet lord.
NWO.
I said SPECIFICALLY there is a power dynamic at play in a relationship between partners of disparate ages DUE TO THE AGE DIFFERENCE. Stop taking my words out of context. Otherwise I’ll have to agree that you’re simply incapable of understanding what “power dynamic” really means.