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?
Amused, that was wonderfully said.
Amused – That does seem to be a good summary of how MRAs see privilege. In some ways it’s a kinda subtle concept. Being privileged doesn’t make one an asshole. Not spontaneously SEEING privilege doesn’t even make one an asshole.
What’s makes a person an asshole is when that person has their privilege pointed out repeatedly and repeatedly denies the existence of it, fights all efforts to even the playing field so that others can have the same privileges, or acts like it is something they deserve because they are actually better people than those who don’t have it. THAT makes a person an asshole.
I am so behind on this thread, but Ami, thank you for being you. I’m glad you’ve gotten to a good place.
And you’re gorgeous, BTW.
Wow, I can’t keep up with this thread to save my life.
I think one of the biggest differences between MRAL and someone like, say, Ami or Bee or myself, is that when we do choose to share something personal about our lives it is usually a) in the context of a discussion where that information is actually relevant, or b) in a thread/discussion that is specifically about personal stuff. Whereas MRAL talks about his life because he thinks everything has to be ALL ABOUT HIM ALL THE TIME EVERYWHERE. It’s really great if someone offers me sympathy when I bring up something that I have gone through, but that’s not why I brought it up.
MRAL, I know that you’re young and you’re going through a really hard time, but trust me, with some time and effort you will reach a point where you realize that not everything is about you, and people aren’t thinking about you, talking about you, staring at your or “spitting” on your all the time. And once you realize that, your life will be so, so much better. Trust me.
And Ami, you are beautiful and awesome, and I’m really happy that you’ve managed to get to a better place in your life.
Awww *hugs Brett and Hellkell* <3
you're both awesome too :3
855 and stalled 🙁
I have a couple of thoughts skimming through this thread, particularly after encountering some of NWO’s predictable rantings:
One, any man who refers to 18-year-olds as “older women” who are just bitter about their waning attractiveness is a pedophile and deserves to be heaped with shame. This conclusion is cemented by the reality that girls become sexually mature as young as 9. A 9-year-old “woman”? Move to KSA, man.
Two, when discussing the age of consent, MRA’s always twist it around and claim that men are prohibited from desiring underage girls or falling in love with them. Age-of-consent laws have nothing to do with love or desire. You can desire whomever you want, have whatever image excites you in your head when you are beating off, and you can fall in love with a 2-year-old, if you wish. What you can’t do, is have sex with someone younger than 18. Them’s the breaks: you don’t get to have sex with whoever you want just because you want to. And by the way, in the “good old days” that you are pining for, when 60-year-old men married 12-year-old girls, you couldn’t have sex with whomever you wanted either. In fact, having sex with the wrong woman of any age — consensual sex, mind you — could easily get you killed and your property confiscated.
Three, I love these arguments based on how some 12-year-olds supposedly “shake it like grown women”. Grown women don’t “shake it” at the general public or strangers. If an adolescent girl is acting in an overtly sexual manner, that is proof that she is, in fact, emotionally and socially immature, a child who is suddenly wearing an adult’s body and doesn’t quite know yet how to handle it properly.
Four, all that whining about a lot of girls under the age of 18 being supposedly mature enough for a sexual relationship is a red herring. Bright-line rules like this make it easier for men to determine who is or isn’t okay to bed, without a painstaking and ultimately vague determination of whether a given woman is mature enough. Clearly, children can easily be taken advantage of by adults, even if they “shake it”. Although different people mature at different ages, society determined, through consensus, the age below which most people are not mature enough to make reasonable choices and to resist coercion. That’s way better than everyone being potential “jail bait”, and having juries determine on an individual basis whether this or that person is an adult. If you fall in love with a 14-year-old and she’s mature enough for a serious relationship, great! Just wait 4 years. It’s not a big deal.
Let there be jars of warm oiled rags while waiting too.
@Kave,
I am so sorry to hear that! If the MRM actually cared about men…
Amused, actually in most states it’s 16 years, so the guys in love with 14-year-olds only have to wait two years.
For those critics who used the observation that there is ‘little difference between the judgement and rationality of a nine year old and a thirty year old (for many, if not most women) there were some WEIRD questions of what to do to govern sexual contact between women and (predatory) men?
I suggested that men who were responsible for the well being of women (husbands, fathers, court appointed guardians, or maybe even older women of the community (of the grandmothers’ generation) et al. may make such decisions for her–and him. I admit that this isn’t perfect, and perhaps someone could think of something better, but it WOULD clearly and permanently solve the “age-of-consent conundrums made inevitable by women’s–fundamentally infantile and irresponsible–impulsive and manipulative nature on one hand, and ungoverned male lust on the other…
PEACE AND FREEDOM!!
David K. Meller
PS–I wasn’t thinking of Saudi Arabia, and I am not sure that the Kingdom has all the answers, but I would wager that e.g. they probably have lower levels of out-of-wedlock pregnancies than we have in ‘God Bless America. Maybe they know something that we don’t.–DKM
Meller: Your entire argument depends on the question begging in your statements: i.e. that women are intellectually inferior to men, and don’t ever get more intellectually developed past the age of roughly 14.
Since you’ve not proven that, the rest of your drivel is… well drivel.
David K. Meller, congratulations. You’ve gone from tedious and wrong to wrong and gross. Women are not children, children are not sex toys, and neither women nor children are property.
As far as using Saudi Arabia as a model for human rights/women’s rights policy — I am not surprised that this is your solution, but GOD I wish you weren’t so stupid. What a waste. Or, in case this is the problem: I wish you were a person who cared more about women being killed by their fathers, husbands, and employers, and less about out-of-wedlock pregnancies.
My suggestions are an imperfect answer for imperfect people in an imperfect world. I DIDN’T use “Saudi Arablia as a model for human rights/women’s “rights” polcy! I even acknowledged that they have some problems too, but what we have in the west–from millions of baby-killings (abortions) per year, to slut walks and ‘human trafficing”, from widespread family breakdown (70%+ of children born out of wedlock in afro-American communities) and an ongoing, obviously insoluble problem of underage sex,..could well be worse!!.
It is embarassing to have to mention this again, but as far as women having the mentality of children about 9-11 years old (for much of their lives, at least until they undergo menopause and become grandmothers etc, I suggest you simply look at all of the posts by women here on manboobz.com,, compare them to men’s posts, not to mention the idiot-box daytime entertainment which caters exclusively to women and children(and their “minds”) as often as you can stand to. Then get back to me and tell men that you think that women are comparable to men in intelligence, judgement, or capacity for rational thought. The proof of the pudding is in the eating!
What are your answers, except for consumption of more of the same poison that has crippled our society, economy, and law in the first place? I am stupid? I am not the one who is blindly committed to endlessly failed policies and ideologies like you all, I am even willing to acknowledge that my recommendations (properly UNDERSTOOD) still have shortcomings, and am willing, even happy, to listen to other ideas, even critical ones.. I am NOT willing to accept mor e of the same loathsome war-of-the-sexes, egalitarian (or female dominance) bilge lunacy that I have–along wwith countless other men of good will–have suffered at YOUR hands for the past half-century or longer! Some ideas on the Spearhead.com, in Mala Fide, AngryHarry and other male-positive websites and blogs may be a little “over-the-top” but they at their worst are still examples of luminous wisdom and goodness compared with your wretched and accursed “equality” feminism, and MISANDRY! You have NO RIGHT to call your critics either “stupid” or “widked” given the inevitable HARM that feminism–and the politics of equallity and democrazy generally–inflicted upon every institution in every society which tried it–often under the guidance of their best and brightest men! You all made too much of a MESS!
I may be wrong in certain ways. But you and your kind of cretinsl are the ones who set policies, initiatives, and standards (?) in the courts, the schools, the armed forces, trade unions, corporate business, the (mainline) churches, and certainly entertainment and the media, both press and iidiot-box, set the norms and standard–or what is left of them, in ALL public association of men and women for the past century or so, and certainly since the 1960s! Even when you have been shown to be utterly wrong, both in theory and in policy, you do nothing else but intenisify the original policy–along iwth a coverup of evidence that demonstrated the failure–call it “reform”, and go on from there.The bloody mess of paedophilia, rape, familiy breakdown, the infestation of workplaces and universities with women, runaway drug and alcohol abuse, etc, is the inevitable result of YOUR ideas and policies carried to their logical conclusion. YOU have blood on YOUR feminsit paws, not me and mine! I am offering suggestions backtrackng from a course that is destroying what is left of western civilization. Any failures or scandals in the contemporary world, at least in its formerly Christian parts, are yours, not mine, not critics of feminuttery and gender egalitarianism run amok, and certainly NOT Moslem fundamentalism or the KIngdom of Saudi Arabia! The most extremist “male chauvinist pigs” couldn’t have done any worse than you people have, even for women and children since c.1914!
PEACE AND FREEDOM!!
David Meller
Meller: You don’t actually offer anything.
I’ve read the comments here. I’ve read your comments. You have no substance. You say, “Oh me! Oh my!, the sky is falling, it would be better if we were more like Saudi Arabia (which is, and has been for centuries, a thriving hub of advancement… you betcha) because they treat women like dirt and don’t have out of wedlock children (unlike backwards Iceland). Mind you, if a woman is raped, they kill her. Is that one of the “problems” you see needing to be fixed?
But you can’t even answer the specific questions you get asked. Instead it’s like dropping a penny in the arcade and seeing a motion picture show on flip-cards. I’ve been in that Army you say is broken. It’s pretty damned functional. Like I said, I’ll take any of the women in uniform, any day of the week, in a situation where the chips are down and clear, level-headed thinking is required.
Why? Because I know they can do it. I’ve seen it. I’ve actually put my life on the line in trust of it. I’m still here to tell the tale.
You… You whine too much. You say stupid shit like, “If properly understood you would see I am right”, which is question begging. Because I don’t see you as being right, I therefore (QED) don’t (as you keep trying to argue) properly understand you.
But I do. You think women are stupid (which I have seen to be wrong, time and again. I never had to go fish my female troops out of bars in the middle of the evening. I didn’t have them getting in trouble with DUIs either. None of them got pregnant by mistake (the same, to hear them tell it, was not true of my male soldiers. Somehow they weren’t able to take care of something as simple as asking if their new best friend was using contraception… if the guys are so smart how did it slip their notice? How could these adult men, so much smarter than the women, fail to avoid this thing the female soldiers managed?).
You look forward to the days of sexbots and slaves.
You are pervert.
Perverted.
DKM,
Apparently, sanctimonious twaddle is all you’ve got to offer.
And it’s not even entertaining anymore.
Traditional western civilization began to fail as soon as a group of colonists decided that there was no divine right to rule. Everything that followed was just the peak before the inevitable decline.
Get over yourself.
It is embarassing to have to mention this again, but as far as women having the mentality of children about 9-11 years old (for much of their lives, at least until they undergo menopause and become grandmothers etc, I suggest you simply look at all of the posts by women here on manboobz.com,, compare them to men’s posts, not to mention the idiot-box daytime entertainment which caters exclusively to women and children(and their “minds”) as often as you can stand to. Then get back to me and tell men that you think that women are comparable to men in intelligence, judgement, or capacity for rational thought. The proof of the pudding is in the eating!
As a woman, I… I feel like the very fact that I’m responding to this kind of disproves it. I don’t even have to get into famous women’s accomplishments in science and leadership and whatnot. The fact that I’m writing in full sentences pretty much covers it.
But congratulations, David K. Meller, you have crossed my personal Troll Line. I’ll tell Eoghan why he’s wrong. I’ll tell MRAL. I’ll even attempt to tell NWO. But you’ve just crossed the “wow, there’s no talking to this person” line.
…God, ew, you think women are like nine-year-olds and you still want to fuck them?
Pecunium – Don’t lump us nice perverts in with his kind! :p
..not to mention the idiot-box daytime entertainment which caters exclusively to women and children(and their “minds”)…
Action. Movies.
Many movies and TV shows that are directed at an adult male audience are really, really bad. I don’t extrapolate from action movies that all men are hence unintelligent (this would be sexist) – instead I speculate about how Hollywood caters to the lowest common denominator, and about how masculinity is being constructed such that men are encouraged to express themselves through violence and to show little emotion.
As for your claim that women writing on this blog do not write as well as men – I disagree. Have you read *any* of NWOslave’s posts? MRAL’s? Grammar, punctuation, logic and making sense – not a strong point of theirs. By contrast, I enjoy reading darksidecat, Holly Pervocracy, Nobinayamu….the list of women (and men) and genderqueer people who comment eloquently here is ridiculously long.
Holly… that’s why I corrected. I didn’t want him to think I’d meant to say, “You’re a pervert”, instead of You’re perverted (as in twisted, wrong, made over to something unnatural).
Actually, Meller: If women are so stupid, how in the name of all that’s right and proper did they convince men to let them out of the nursery/bedroom/kitchen?
After all, if the meanest intelligence can see how foolish and silly they are… how is it they managed to win the battles of persuasion required to get the vote, etc.?
Hey David (not that you respond to things): Here’s a description of X-ray crystallography, the method Rosalind Franklin used to discover the double helix structure of DNA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-ray_crystallography
Let me know when you even understand that article, mkay? (I’ll freely admit that I don’t completely, but that’s my problem for not studying it; my point is that women have not only studied but pioneered technologies on this level.)
Ack! Please don’t refer to him as “David.” We don’t really consider him part of the David community.
Does no one else find him as funny as I do? I mean, come on, this is golden:
Also, HE SIGNS HIS P.S.es!!! It’s freaking adorable.
I think I may have to do a “Best of David K. Meller” post some time soon.
David, I’ve already gone on record as finding Meller kind of refreshing. Quaint actually; like long-winded Archie Bunker. I feel bad for saying so, but I think he’s funny.