Sweet sanity on statutory!

I was going to do a compilation style post in which I comment on a bunch of news stories, but I realized that three of the four stories I had gathered all revolved around the same topic – the statutory rape issue. This is a somewhat thorny topic in the manosphere (the Roissysphere, not so much) for both obvious reasons – the whole adult men having sex with teenage girls thing – and because many people rightly suspect that feminist trolls are trying to discredit anti-feminists by tarring them as pedophiles. Still, I think this issue needs to be approached in a sensible manner.

Note for retards and actual pedophiles: I do not support allowing men to have sex with children, defined here as girls under 14 or pre-pubescent/undergoing puberty. That is sick, perverted behavior that should be punished to the full extent of the law. Got that? Then let’s move on.

The first story was dropped by Game in BK last week, concerning a man who was jailed for having a porno featuring a twenty-three year old starlet who happens to look underage:

The Crime and Federalism blog reports on the case of Carlos Alfredo Simon-Timmerman, a New Yorker who was stopped in Puerto Rico last year on his way back from a vacation in Venezuela. Simon-Timmerman was stopped by U.S. Customs agents, who found a pornographic video in his bag entitled Little Lupe the Innocent; Don’t Be Fooled By Her Baby Face. The movie featured Lupe Fuentes, a porn actress who, as the movie title suggests, is  a 23-year-old with a more youthful appearance.

Fuentes is currently under contract with a U.S. porn production company, and has made movies for other U.S. companies in the past. Those companies are required by federal law to keep records showing that all participants in their adult films are of legal age.  That means Assistant U.S. Attorney Jenifer Yois Hernandez-Vega could have verified Fuentes’ age with as little effort as a Google search and a phone call. (Hell, she probably could have just consulted one of the porn experts at the Securities and Exchange Commission.)

Instead, the prosecutor pushed ahead with child pornography charges against Simon-Timmerman, even after the man’s attorney was able to show that Fuentes had appeared in movies produced in the U.S., as well as other documentation that Fuentes was of legal age at the time the movie was made.

Hernandez-Vega still didn’t buy it. Her evidence that Fuentes was a minor was apparently so strong that she not only apparently felt she didn’t need to take 15 minutes to look up the proof of Fuentes’ age on file with the federal government, she could also dismiss the evidence produced by Simon-Timmerman’s attorney that his client hadn’t broken any law—all while keeping Simon-Timmerman locked up for months.

And what was that evidence? “Expert” testimony. At trial, Hernandez-Vega called Alek Pacheco, A U.S. Customs agent and self-described expert in child pornography who concluded (presumably after viewing the video several times) that Fuentes was “13 or 14″ years of age.

It took nothing less than the intervention of Fuentes herself to get our boy out of jail:

Thus, Simon-Timmerman’s hope lay in one long-shot gamble: Little Lupe herself would have to fly to Puerto Rico, show her passport to the prosecutor, and testify under oath that she was really, really not 13 years old.

“My fans mean everything to me, ” Fuentes told Asylum via her publicist. “It was important to me to make the trip to Puerto Rico to show support to someone who did no wrong.”

And it’s not like being mistaken for a teenager is totally unfamiliar to the star, either — she’s had to explain herself to everyone from United States courts to the King of All Media.

“I think Howard Stern was a little scared when I came into the studio for his show — he kept telling Robin that they were going to get arrested.”

Fortunately, thanks to Little Lupe’s good nature, both Stern and Simon-Timmerman can walk the streets as free men.

The above pictures of Little Lupe I found either in the links or floating around the Interwebs. This chick is supposed to pass for a teenage girl? Maybe if you’ve gone partially blind due to excessive masturbation, or are a feminist prosecutor not interested in the facts, she could fit the bill.

Next, here’s a story about Facebook helping to crack down on pedophiles in the U.K.:

FACEBOOK today launches panic buttons for young users who fear online perverts may be targeting them.

Every youngster aged 13 to 18 who logs on to the site will be informed of the service.

The buttons will provide a link to the UK’s Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre.

It comes after The Sun campaigned for the move following a series of internet paedophile scandals. Convicted sex offender Peter Chapman, 33, murdered Ashleigh Hall, 17, of Darlington, after meeting her on Facebook.

Note the rhetorical sleight-of-hand in the last paragraph, placing Peter Chapman’s murder of a 17-year old girl after a sentence about “internet paedophile scandals.” Chapman is a sick fuck who deserves to rot in jail, but one thing he is not is a pedophile, considering that pedophilia is sexual desire for pre-pubescent children and the girl he pursued and killed was well past puberty.

Finally, here’s a story I grabbed from Schopenbecq’s blog on a French football player who’s being prosecuted for banging an underage prostitute:

Ribery has never denied having paid for sex with Zahia Dehar, now 18, but his lawyer has said that the player had no idea in that she was under-age. Miss Dehar has also said he was unaware of this.

Barbara Stockinger, a spokeswoman for the public prosecutors’ office in the southern city, home to Ribery’s club Bayern Munich, said: “We are looking into whether to begin a formal investigation.”

Miss Dehar has said that Ribery had her flown over from Paris and that they had sex in a Munich hotel on the player’s 26th birthday in April 2009. He has admitted paying for her flight and hotel room.

Ribery, now 27, was hauled in for seven hours of questioning by Paris magistrates on Tuesday and was placed under formal judicial investigation.

Like in France, in Germany the general age of consent is 15 years, but in the case of prostitution a young person remains legally a minor until he or she reaches 18.

Again, let’s back up here. This hooker that Franck Ribery screwed was seventeen. Not twelve or thirteen, but seventeen, just a year shy of being a legal adult. Can anyone explain to me why this guy should go to jail for fucking a seventeen year old? This isn’t a Roman Polanski drug-the-girl-and-rape-her scenario, because this girl CONSENTED to the sex. And spare me the hand-wringing over “exploitation,” you whiny moralizers. Prostitutes aren’t children – they know PRECISELY what they are doing.

All three of these stories touch on the same theme – how the age of consent issue is used to pathologize and criminalize normal, healthy male sexuality. For those interested in reading up on this topic, I highly recommend the aforementioned Schopenbecq – while I disagree with him on some things, he’s the only blogger who covers this issue with any regularity. Agnostic also used to talk about the pleasures of teen girls when he was still cool and wasn’t obsessed with pulling random theories out of his ass. Jay Hammers wrote on age of consent several months ago alleging that the present laws are misandrist:

Arbitrary age of consent is not the same as laws restricting alcohol consumption based on age or the same as the voting age, which primarily affect the individual whose age is of issue. The intent of the age of consent laws is NOT to restrict young people from engaging in a sex act; it is to punish older people from engaging in an act based on the age of the “victim”. This can only happen in a society where punishment for crimes varies based on arbitrary factors: the sex of the victim, the sex of the perpetrator, the age of the victim, or the age of the perpetrator. Such a society is not just. This is the society we live in today, where the punishment for a crime is greater if you are male, if the victim is female, if the victim is younger, if you are older.

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. A society that criminalizes this is a society that values females over males and treats women as if they are children.

Roissy also wrote on statutory rape recently:

Which brings me to a larger issue. What the fuck is up with statutory rape? It’s a joke law made up by joke legislators without a scintilla of real world experience with women. Am I supposed to request age identification from every full-bodied young woman who comes onto me? There are 13 year olds out there who look like grown women. At the borderline of 16 to 18 years old, many women could easily pass for mid to late 20s. It is well known by neuroscientists and psychologists studying these things that women mature faster than men. Women’s brains gel into adult-shaped contours sooner. A full breasted and wide-hipped 17 year old hottie who flirts with me knows exactly what she is doing and what she wants. She is no child to be coddled. And yet, I could be thrown in jail if I slept with her assuming she was an older girl, even if it was something we both consensually desired.

This is abject bullshit. The law makes it a necessity to demand age identification with every young woman a man might want to fuck who could conceivably pass for a teenager. This means background checks on women in their 20s. And what about women who lie? They exist, lots of them. Is a statutory rape charge for the man the just response — the *fair* response — to a lying woman who wanted the sex as much as he?

It’s time to end the charade of statutory rape. If the “underage” woman is physically developed, and she consents to the sex, there is no rape charge, period. For chrissakes, there are 14 year olds in parts of the world getting married off and pumping out children of their own.

Aunt Haley wrote a response to Roissy defending the status quo:

There’s always a price to pay for sex, and female sexuality in particular has always been pretty pricey.  In the past, it was protected by social pressure and personal restraint through religious convictions.  Now that both of those have largely fallen by the wayside, the law has stepped in to mandate self-restraint.  Kind of ironic that women are more “available” than ever, but in order to achieve that, the most desirable women are less attainable than ever.

While I generally take a sort of “eh, whatever” opinion of it (much like I do with circumcision), I’ve decided to write this post arguing against so-called “statutory rape” by demolishing all the arguments for it that I can think of.

Raising the age of consent was a response to the Sexual Revolution to protect teenage girls from being taken advantage of. Wrong. Abnormally high ages of consent are largely unique to America and to the Anglosphere in general. In most continental European countries, the age of consent is lower. For comparison, ages of consent in U.S. states range from 16 to 18, and it is 16 in Canada (it used to be 14 up until 2008), Britain, New Zealand, and Australia (exempting South Australia and Tasmania, where it’s 17). In contrast, the age of consent is 15 in France, Poland and Sweden, 14 in Germany and Italy, and 13 in Spain (?). In fact, the raising of the ages of consent in the U.S. occurred long before the Sexual Revolution, during the early 20th century as the result of women-led “social purity” campaigns that began in the late 1800′s. The genesis of statutory rape has little to do with the Sexual Revolution and everything to do with America’s Puritan roots. (Note that the same people who campaigned to raise the age of consent were the same ones who supported Prohibition. You moralizers sure know how to pick winners, eh?)

Statutory rape laws keep girls from getting pregnant at an age when they are unable to care for a child properly. Also bunk. The same European countries that have low ages of consent also have lower rates of teen pregnancy than those prim and proper Anglosphere countries. And even still, we have cheap and widely available contraception to keep those eggs from getting fertilized and abortion as a last-ditch method to get rid of unwanted rugrats.

Statutory rape laws keep teenage girls from being sexually exploited at a naive age. This rests on the assumption that all teen girls are asexual angels who are being taken advantage by those dastardly lecherous men. Only someone who has never spent any time around teenagers (or who can’t remember their high school years) could seriously argue this. Most teenagers are very aware of their sexual power and frequently use it to get what they want. Agnostic has written extensively on this and here are some posts of his that I recommend:

“Corrupted by the Youth”

“The Dangers of Dating a Much Younger Girl”

“What Kind of Girl Goes Into Porn?”

“The Temptation of Saint Agnostic” (series)

I can back this up with my own observations. When I was a teenager, most of my female high school classmates were always flirting with the male teachers. While not overt, their mannerisms and attitude became more seductive whenever they spoke to a teacher they either thought was cute or wanted to get something out of. This was at a Catholic school, for crying out loud! (You’d be surprised at how many piercings and tattoos you could hide under those Oxford shirts.) And if you own a used book that once belonged to a teenage girl, you will probably be able to find paeans to the dreaminess of whatever teacher she crushed on at the time scribbled in the margins. Fact is if you’re a teacher who is in good physical shape, dresses well and has a bit of game, there’s no way to NOT get hit on by your female students. If I had followed through on my plans to get my master’s degree and certification, I could easily clean up with the junior and senior girls of any school I taught at (and subsequently get fired for sleeping with students). The point is is that the average teen girl is anything but naive when it comes to sex – the Ashleigh Halls of the world are a small minority, low-hanging fruit for disgusting perverts.

Statutory rape laws prevent teenage girls from making stupid decisions. If that’s the case, why is it that the girls in statutory rape cases are never punished? Or, more appropriately, why aren’t their PARENTS, who are the ones responsible for making sure their babies don’t grow up to be sluts, never punished? If the goal is to prevent people from doing stupid things, the best way to do that is to make stupidity painful and costly, yet in this case the stupid people always get off scot free. It’s like Scandinavian feminist prostitution laws that allow whores to sell themselves freely but prosecute the men who take advantage of their services.

Statutory rape laws protect female sexuality. Then why do we have Romeo and Juliet laws? Why is it traumatizing for a sixteen-year old girl to have sex with a twenty-four year old guy but not with a sixteen-year old? Most teenage boys in America are unholy terrors. As an example, the story I told here happened when I was in my late teens. When I was in high school, I was even worse, an immature mouth-breathing hormonal asstard who couldn’t think beyond his inappropriately erect cock. I could never get a date because I was a girl-repelling, braying jackass, and it’s a wonder how I even managed to lose my virginity then. Most teen boys are like that. A sixteen-year old penis robs a teenage womb of its value as much as a twenty-four year old one, so why is the former let off the hook?

Wanting to do a teenager under 18 is something only an emotionally stunted pervert who can’t get a date with a woman his own age would do. Feminist drivel. It is HARDER for men to woo girls younger than they are by a significant age margin, which is why so few guys do it. Teenage girls are the hardest of all, as Agnostic explains here. As for the feminists’ attempts to demonize men for being attracted to teenage girls, this is laughable. Most girls are fully developed by the time they hit their late teens, possessing most if not all of the physical aspects that they’ll carry into their legal years. If you don’t believe me, have a look at this page. I imagine most of you guys would want to bang half the girls pictured there, and possibly more. You’re telling me that being attracted to this is wrong but wanting a piece of this is perfectly normal?

There’s no historical precedent for an adult-on-teen sex free-for-all. There’s no historical precedent for many of the other factors that make our current general sexual free-for-all possible either. There’s no historical precedent for a lot of what’s going on today. Relying on the past as a roadmap for the future is only useful up to a certain point. It’s unlikely that even if the age of consent was lowered that a “free-for-all” would even occur, as teens in America are sufficiently segregated from the rest of the population that actually penetrating their social circles is much more difficult (as Agnostic mentioned in the “Dangers” post I linked above).

The fact is that there’s no justification whatsoever for leaving statutory rape law the way it is. It’s a clusterfuck of CONservative moralizing, feminist pussy price control, and lazy parents expecting everyone else to raise their kids but them. It’s much like the bogus War on Drugs, which has done nothing to stop drug trafficking and usage but has succeeded in getting a lot of nonviolent drug users having their rectums split open by HIV-positive convicts in penitentiaries across America. There is no reason to ruin the lives of men who have consensual sex with teenage girls and don’t cause any real harm.

At the same time, while the card-carrying members of the He-Man Woman Haters Club will get mad at me for saying this, there are legitimate reasons to protect minor teens from the potential predations of older men. Therefore, my proposal to remedy the situation is to drop the age of consent to 15 or 14 for females, raise it to around 17 or 18 for males (since boys mature more slowly than girls), and add an age of consent to be impregnated, as detailed by Schopenbecq here:

Jail a man if he gets a girl under 18 pregnant. On that, the older partner has to have some responsibility (and if we replaced age of consent to sex with age of consent to be impregnated, your vile teen pregnancy rates would tumble).

My conception of this setup is slightly different than Schopenbecq’s. Under my system, any man who impregnates a girl at or above the age of consent but legally a minor gets his ass sent to prison. We could also force him to pay for an abortion (if the girl or her parents decide to get one) or child support bills (if she doesn’t), though I’m on the fence about that. (MRAs, keep in mind that a man paying child support for an adult woman with full legal rights and earning potential is different than paying for a teenager who doesn’t have either.) Also, add prohibitions for relationships in which the senior partner has power over the junior one (the above mentioned example of high school teachers, for instance) that carry a light sentence. Any man who has sex with a girl below the age of consent gets tried as a pedophile and molester. Naturally, rapists and murderers get tried as normal. Everybody wins!

Alternately, we can get serious about defending the virtue of women by making having sex with any girl under 18 illegal for any man of any age, save for husbands. No more Romeo and Juliet laws – same-aged teen guys and adult men BOTH get sent to Prison Block D where they can be the passaround bitch for the local Aryan Brotherhood cell. It’s only fair, after all.

Under my preferred arrangement, the onus for making sure teenage girls don’t get sexually exploited falls on the parents to safeguard her and teach her how to weed out dirtbags and scumfucks – which is where it should be. If you’ve raised your daughter right, she should be fine. And if that fails, daddy can always smash the sleazy bastard’s skull in with a rock. There are a lot of problems in this world that could be solved with the frequent and strategic application of shotgun shells.

I still don’t think the statutory rape issue should be a big concern for MRAs. There are bigger – and less controversial – fish to fry. Still, it’s something worth thinking about.

Tagged as: Agnostic, Aunt Haley, Chateau, Franck Ribery, Jay Hammers, Lupe Fuentes, Schopenbecq