Posts tagged ‘meaning of the word’

"I-need-to-go-home" means "stop". ?And failing to stop in the midst of consensual sex is "rape".  A boy who failed to read the girl’s mind and make the appropriate interpretion of her cryptic comments was sent to jail for "I-need-to-to-home"-rape or "can’t-understand-women’s-subtle-hints-rape".

It is none of the 20 types of rape,  and different from the "5-second-rape" where the "Stop" was explicit and clear. So we are up to 21 types of rape and counting.

During consensual sex girl says "I need to go home" and "I should be going now".  "No" means "No", and "I should be going now" means "Stop".   Women like men to read their mind and understand their indirect speech. But failure to understand a woman’s veiled hint now is punishable with long jail terms for"rape".

In our modern language aberration, everything is the same:  there is no difference between "forcible rape at knife point", taking 5 seconds to stop consensual sex when the girl says "stop" ("5-second-rape"), or taking 90 seconds to understand the deeper meaning of "I should be going now", all is the same: "rape". Our language is becoming more and more impoverished and is losing its precision and subltety, thanks to feminist manipulative language that sees only black and white with no nuances.

The 2000 case involved two 17-year-olds who had sex in a bedroom during a party. The boy testified that the sex was consensual and that he stopped when the girl demanded. She testified the boy kept having sex with her for about a "minute and a half" after she called it off.

The boy was convicted of rape and served about six months in a juvenile facility. The high court affirmed that conviction Monday.

Justice Janice Rogers Brown, while agreeing with the majority on what constitutes rape, dissented on whether the boy was guilty. She wrote that the girl never clearly said stop, instead saying "I should be going now" and "I need to go home."

Brown also wondered how much time a man has to stop once a woman says stop.

"Ten seconds? Thirty?" she wrote.   foxnews.com

Freerepublic reports on the "I-should-be-going-rape". The comments of the Free Republic readers are enlightening.

Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading ‘Consensual sex becomes rape as soon as woman says "I need to go home", says California Supreme Court.’ » »
Consensual sex becomes rape as soon as woman says "I need to … » continues here »

"Rape" means a dozen different things. They are not the same! What perfidy:

  1. "Rape" had a clear, well defined meaning for thousands of years, until re-defined by feminists. The re-defined "rape" includes half a dozen acts that formerly had their own names and were not rape.
  2. Then vice president Biden comes hammering that all these dozen types of rape are the same. This is deceptive, because most of his listeners imagine he is talking about true-forcible-rape, not about Swedish-broken-condom-rape, 5-second-rape, consensual-sex-with-adolescent-girlfriend-future-wife-rape, duped-by-victim-into-raping-her-rape or didn’t-get-consent-in-writing-rape.
  3. This purposeful politically motivated rape ambiguity leads to equivocation and misunderstandings.  This must be intentional and can only be politically motivated, because everywhere else we take pride in defining terms clearly, succinctly, concisely and unambiguously.  (other exceptions are the closely related definitions of consent, child,

 

Joe Biden: "Rape is rape is rape" | YouTube

Vice president Joe Biden, praising the University of New Hampshire’s sexual assault policy, Biden said: "rape is rape is rape".

Vice president Joe Biden said more stupid and patently wrong things on that day, but that is beyond the scope of our article. See:
Are One in Five College Women Sexually Assaulted? (The vice president buys into the campus-rape lie.) He fell prey, or rather is part of the relentless feminist lie and deception campaign to bedevil men as rapists.

 

Rape is not rape is not rape is not rape

Rape is ill defined, is ill defined, is ill defined. Dozens of types-of-rape

"A rape is a rape is a rape" is a lie, Joe Biden! What perfidy! Manipulative ambiguity is perfidy.  Who thinks that all these are the same? It is an offense to victims of true-forcible-rape to conflate their true violent victimization with other kind of consensual rape.

 

1) True-forcible-rape (rape-rape)

A women gets threatened by 3 thugs with knives, dragged into the woods, held down, raped and beaten, while screaming. Dragging-into-the-bushes-at-knife-point-rape is the classical meaning of rape and is what most people imagine when they hear the word "rape".

This is the perfidy of the language abuse regarding the meaning of the word "rape". It is difficult to justify a long prison term and sex offender registration for kissing-underage-girlfriend-rape. See Equivocation | Wikipedia

rapist_Julian_Assange2) Swedish-broken-condom-rape 

In the Julian Assange case, the women decided to press charges after they found out that Assange had sex with both of them (revenge-for-for-being-cheated-rape). They used a Swedish law that sex without condom is rape. This gained so much power because the United States (where broken-condoms-sex is not rape) wants to punish Julian Assange for unusual and unprecedented publishing-confidential-documents-rape  (see cartoon)

3) Consensual-sex-with-adolescent-girl-friend-rape

"Rape" means a dozen different things. They are not the same! What perfidy:

  1. "Rape" had a clear, well defined meaning for thousands of years, until re-defined by feminists. The re-defined "rape" includes half a dozen acts that formerly had their own names and were not rape.
  2. Then vice president Biden comes hammering that all these dozen types of rape are the same. This is deceptive, because most of his listeners imagine he is talking about true-forcible-rape, not about Swedish-broken-condom-rape, 5-second-rape, consensual-sex-with-adolescent-girlfriend-future-wife-rape, duped-by-victim-into-raping-her-rape or didn’t-get-consent-in-writing-rape.
  3. This purposeful politically motivated rape ambiguity leads to equivocation and misunderstandings.  This must be intentional and can only be politically motivated, because everywhere else we take pride in defining terms clearly, succinctly, concisely and unambiguously.  (other exceptions are the closely related definitions of consent, child,

 

Joe Biden: "Rape is rape is rape"|YouTube

Vice president Joe Biden, praising the University of New Hampshire’s sexual assault policy, Biden said: "rape is rape is rape".

Vice president Joe Biden said more stupid and patently wrong things on that day, but that is beyond the scope of our article. See:
Are One in Five College Women Sexually Assaulted? (The vice president buys into the campus-rape lie.) He fell prey, or rather is part of the relentless feminist lie and deception campaign to bedevil men as rapists.

 

Rape is not rape is not rape is not rape

Rape is ill defined, is ill defined, is ill defined. Dozens of types-of-rape

"A rape is a rape is a rape" is a lie, Joe Biden! What perfidy! Manipulative ambiguity is perfidy.  Who thinks that all these are the same? It is an offense to victims of true-forcible-rape to conflate their true violent victimization with other kind of consensual rape.

 

1) True-forcible-rape (rape-rape)

A women gets threatened by 3 thugs with knives, dragged into the woods, held down, raped and beaten, while screaming. Dragging-into-the-bushes-at-knife-point-rape is the classical meaning of rape and is what most people imagine when they hear the word "rape".

This is the perfidy of the language abuse regarding the meaning of the word "rape". It is difficult to justify a long prison term and sex offender registration for kissing-underage-girlfriend-rape. See Equivocation | Wikipedia

rapist_Julian_Assange2) Swedish-broken-condom-rape 

In the Julian Assange case, the women decided to press charges after they found out that Assange had sex with both of them (revenge-for-for-being-cheated-rape). They used a Swedish law that sex without condom is rape. This gained so much power because the United States (where broken-condoms-sex is not rape) wants to punish Julian Assange for unusual and unprecedented publishing-confidential-documents-rape  (see cartoon)

3) Consensual-sex-with-adolescent-girl-friend-rape

"Rape" means a dozen different things. They are not the same! What perfidy:

  1. "Rape" had a clear, well defined meaning for thousands of years, until re-defined by feminists. The re-defined "rape" includes half a dozen acts that formerly had their own names and were not rape.
  2. Then vice president Biden comes hammering that all these dozen types of rape are the same. This is deceptive, because most of his listeners imagine he is talking about true-forcible-rape, not about Swedish-broken-condom-rape, 5-second-rape, consensual-sex-with-adolescent-girlfriend-future-wife-rape, duped-by-victim-into-raping-her-rape or didn’t-get-consent-in-writing-rape.
  3. This purposeful politically motivated rape ambiguity leads to equivocation and misunderstandings.  This must be intentional and can only be politically motivated, because everywhere else we take pride in defining terms clearly, succinctly, concisely and unambiguously.  (other exceptions are the closely related definitions of consent, child,

 

Joe Biden: "Rape is rape is rape"|YouTube

Vice president Joe Biden, praising the University of New Hampshire’s sexual assault policy, Biden said: "rape is rape is rape".

Vice president Joe Biden said more stupid and patently wrong things on that day, but that is beyond the scope of our article. See:
Are One in Five College Women Sexually Assaulted? (The vice president buys into the campus-rape lie.) He fell prey, or rather is part of the relentless feminist lie and deception campaign to bedevil men as rapists.

 

Rape is not rape is not rape is not rape

Rape is ill defined, is ill defined, is ill defined. Dozens of types-of-rape

"A rape is a rape is a rape" is a lie, Joe Biden! What perfidy! Manipulative ambiguity is perfidy.  Who thinks that all these are the same? It is an offense to victims of true-forcible-rape to conflate their true violent victimization with other kind of consensual rape.

 

1) True-forcible-rape (rape-rape)

A women gets threatened by 3 thugs with knives, dragged into the woods, held down, raped and beaten, while screaming. Dragging-into-the-bushes-at-knife-point-rape is the classical meaning of rape and is what most people imagine when they hear the word "rape".

This is the perfidy of the language abuse regarding the meaning of the word "rape". It is difficult to justify a long prison term and sex offender registration for kissing-underage-girlfriend-rape. See Equivocation | Wikipedia

rapist_Julian_Assange2) Swedish-broken-condom-rape 

In the Julian Assange case, the women decided to press charges after they found out that Assange had sex with both of them (revenge-for-for-being-cheated-rape). They used a Swedish law that sex without condom is rape. This gained so much power because the United States (where broken-condoms-sex is not rape) wants to punish Julian Assange for unusual and unprecedented publishing-confidential-documents-rape  (see cartoon)

3) Consensual-sex-with-adolescent-girl-friend-rape


Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading ‘"Rape is rape is rape" is a lie, Joe Biden! 20 different types of rape!’ » »
"Rape is rape is rape" is a lie, Joe Biden! 20 different… » continues here »

OTTAWA – John Reilly, a retired judge and Liberal candidate for the Alberta riding of Wild Rose, was forced to apologize Thursday for suggesting in a radio interview that not all sexual offenders should be incarcerated.

Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff called an Alberta candidate’s comments on sexual offenders "disgraceful,” but said he has accepted Reilly’s apology and he’ll continue to serve as the party’s candidate for the riding.
Alberta Liberal candidate John Reilly apologizes for remarks on sexual assault 

John Reilly, former Judge and Liberal Party Candidate in Alberta, CanadaThe "sexual assault":

she goes, gets into bed naked, he goes up, he’s thinking he’s going to be able to, that she’ll probably agree to have sex with him, he fondles her privates, and she wakes up and tells him to go away, and he goes away. They report it, he’s charged with sexual offence, he has digitally penetrated her,  
Judge John Reilly interview

Most likely the defendant did not stick the entire finger in there but just passed the limit with one phalanx.  Also he was ill advised and probably admitted the penetration before getting a lawyer’s advice. Of course, the women would always be believed anyway

Now this does not look like a habitual predator, the judge is totally right.

But, this is an example how powerful the feminist language distortion is. Call some behavior "rape" or "sexual assault", and the perpetrator is to be crucified. If you told it by the real name, "fondling the privates of a naked girl while sleeping at a party", that would not cause the feeding punishing frenzy in the interviewer and the populace. You can notice this in the strong reactions of the interviewer in the written and his aggravated tone in the audio transcript.

Former judge John Reilly’s interview with The Rutherford Show Transcript

Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading ‘Judge John Reilly forced to apologize for differentiating nerd’s groping from sexual assault’ » »
Judge John Reilly forced to apologize for differentiating nerdR… » continues here »

The United Nations manipulated the definition of "child" on purpose! So child protection laws could be extended to adolescent youth without need to be voted again. Human-Stupidity.com found the smoking gun. Proof is on the United Nations web site.

Q – What does the UN mean by "youth," and
how does this definition differ from that given to children?

The United Nations, for statistical purposes, defines ‘youth’, as those persons between the ages of 15 and 24 years,[...]  By that definition, therefore, children are those persons under the age of 14.
It is, however, worth noting that Article 1 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child defines ‘children’ as persons up to the age of 18. This was intentional, as it was hoped that the Convention would provide protection and rights to as large an age-group as possible and because there was no similar United Nations Convention on the Rights of Youth. (www.UN.org)

The United Nations web site confesses, expressis verbis, that the language confusion was created so that childhood laws could be transferred to adolescents, without undergoing scrutiny and without needing to be voted for. The United Nations, on their own website, admit that this age definition was made for manipulative purposes, and in contradiction of  their own age definitions elsewhere.

"Seduction of an adolescent" or "unlawful sex with a 17-year-old" does not sound dramatic enough. It is easier to get harsh laws against "child rapists". Equally, it is easier to convict for "child pornography" then for possession of tasteful "nude photos of a 17 year old".  Just manipulate the language to manipulate the masses! And government, press, judges, jury.

For the past 2000 years, before feminists took over the United Nations,

  • a child was a person under 12 or 14 years of age
  • pornography was depiction explicit sexual activity
  • rape was violent forceful sexual penetration against a resisting victim
  • consent was, well, consent. Saying yes. Independent of age.

Is it not strange that all these terms were diluted to create confusion?

We will focus on how the United Nations manipulated the definition of "Child" in order to force the world to ratify child protection laws for adolescent youths.

"If you look under 35 years of age, show ID to buy alcohol"

"If you look under 35 years of age, show ID to buy alcohol" read the sign at the supermarket checkout. For the supermarket cashier, it is "Better be safe then sorry."

Nobody goes to jail for 15 years for selling alcohol to someone slightly underage.  So to be safe,

"If S/he looks under 35 years of age, don’t propose sex, nor kissing, nor possess nude photos of her/him

Most people are unaware: Age of consent  laws and "child" porn laws don’t just scare people away from "underage" persons.

To be on the safe side, one should not possess porn with anyone that looks under 25 or 30, and not try to get involved romantically with anyone that looks under 30.

"Eschew obfuscation"  (avoid being unclear)!

Legal argument and laws about "child pornography" and "child abuse" severely violate this basic rule from from college writing classes English 101. Science and law also try to get clear and concise definitions.

To foster the political goal of curbing adolescent sexuality and erotic depictions, the United Nations leads the world into obfuscation.

Due to United Nations influence,
our language lost the capacity to differentiate between totally different situations

,,,people assume that a person labeled with possession of CP [child p ornography] automatically is looking at pictures of 4 yr olds having sex with adults etc…when the law actually is worded to where you could have a clothed picture of a 16yr old female and have it be considered CP…  prisontalk.com

 

 
The following are all the same now.

2 year olds, 7 year olds, 11 year old children

=

15 y or 17 year old adolescent youth.

=

All above are "Children"

 

 

As a result of United Nations language manipulation, the following are the same:

Indecently fondling a 17 year old 
fully dressed long term girlfriend, with her consent

= forceful non-consenting violent injury causing rape of a kidnapped 4 year old
Both above are "child rape". "Non-consensual" sex.
And the depictions of both are the same. Child Pornography.

We think this is demagogic. unscientific. Purposeful misleading.  Disgusting.

You did not understand that this is the same? click on "more" below and we will show you why, step by step

Furthermore we will also use medical science and developmental psychology to scientifically define "child" and the phases of childhood.  In a subsequent post, later, we will critique the Copine and Sap scales for failing to differentiate between infants and adolescents, between consent and non-consent.

Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading ‘17 year old "children"? United Nations confesses political manipulation of "child" definition’ » »
17 year old "children"? United Nations confesses politic… » continues here »

The power of feminists is awe inspiring.
Feminists conquered  and brainwashed the minds of lawmakers, police, press, the United Nations.

And people are not even aware of the sweeping changes feminists did, to encroach upon men’s rights, men’s well being, freedom. How much terror feminists managed to sow with teenage sex and child porn witch hunts. This sounds exaggerated? Please read on.

The feminist social manipulation skill superiority hypothesis

Females are superior in social manipulation & language distortion to foster their reproductive interest (An evolutionary hypothesis).

More provocatively it could be called “feminist cunningness hypothesis”, female evolutionary cunningness hypthesis, ……   Any more naming suggestions?

Hypothesis: Females are vastly superior in social manipulation skills

In evolution, everything is result of an evolutionary arms race.  (cheetah and gazelle’s running skills, bacteria vs. our bodily defense system, …) Skills and capacities get honed over time, to solve evolutionary tasks.  Women, in evolutionary time, had the hard task to convince a much stronger man to assume his paternal role and take care of her offspring (which might be his, or even just his cuckold offspring).  In any argument, men had clear superiority with 2 powerful weapons

  • economical superiority: men were the hunters, they had the meat, they also could defend and own territory
  • physical superiority: men could always win an argument by brute force, by simple violence.

So to achieve some kind of evolutionary long term equilibrium, women must have developed some weapeons to counter men’s economical & physical power. What weapons could they have?

  • Social manipulation: gossiping among women, ganging up together against the common enemy, making intrigues, badmouthing a man, destroying his reputation, manipulating the opinion of other men (and women).

Women would actually need the skills to win over other men to defend the female agenda. In order to counter men’s physical superiority, women needed to be better then men at these social manipulation skills.  They could not confront men clearly straight on, or else men could resort to the big stick argument. They would have to “con” men into doing what is in women’s interest, without men noticing.

Women would have to manipulate epecially skillfully, when it has to do with reproductive success, with getting men to provide for them and their kids, with men staying away from other women.

So the historical stone age balance of power is:
  • men have economical and physical superiority,
  • women have verbal manipulation, cunningness, intrigue, social manipulation.
Nowadays, men surrendered their physical and economical power. Women maintained and expanded their verbal manipulative social power
    Men surrendered both their advantages. Winning an argument with physical violence became criminalized. Women got to earn their own money, plus they get the government to collect pension money and child support from fathers that must pay up but have no say over how their money is being used. So most of the male power advantage waned.
    Mass media and the internet even increased the verbal manipulative power of women beyond what they had in the evolutionary EEA, 50 000 years ago. 
    This would explain womens total win on all fronts. They started winning when they outlawed bigamy, made it a crime for consensual adults to engange in marriage with several partners, and now are curtailing the rights to have consensual sex for pay, with adolescents, take one’s own photograph and doing DNA tests on one’s own children.

Anecdotal and other Evidence

It is self evident that women must have developed some skills to counter the obvious male physical superiority.

I will explain the

reasoning behind my female-social-manipulation-superiority hypothesis.

I was inspired by the

antifeminist blog’s feminist-trade-union-hypothesis.

Feminism as middle aged womens trade union to promote their selfish reproductive interest, even their plain interest in an easy life, trying to curb men’s access to more attractive or cheaper competitors.

I was wondering:

Why and with which methods do the feminist trade unions score such resounding victories
  • how do feminists convince everyone else to promote their goals?
  • And why are they winning the war on all fronts with absolute resounding victory?
  • there must be a special evolutionary skill how feminists manage to convince male law makers to support their warped feminist  “women studies” logic and distract from the egalitarian goal of creating “men’s studies” and “men’s rights” (Feminist arguments against prostitution debunked)
Distortion and re-definition of language

When a “Rape” is not a Rape! The Abuse of the word “Rape”. & the Perversion of Language shows how language got re-defined for purely manipulative purposes.

Wait, there is more! This article continues! Please read on, don’t miss the rest of the Feminist Social Manipulation Superiority Hypothesis »
Female evolutionary Superiority in social manipulation causes femi… » continues here »

Change.org silences dissent

Hi Stupidity, it seems that you have been on a bit of a crusade the past day or so on lots of posts from the last month related to rape.

Call it an anti-crusade. Feminists have been on a very successful crusade to re-define language and change legal due process. So a vengeful women’s lone unproven accusation can instantly get the real victim, the falsely accused, into jail. Unlike all other crimes, where proof or multiple witnesses are needed.

Specifically, you have posted fairly demeaning dismissals of victims and the definition of rape.

Demeaning dismissals of linguistic definitions. That is how far we have gotten. Even definitions of terms can not be questioned. The essence of taboos to perpetuate witch hunts and make sure the masses are deceived by misleading perverted re-definition of terms like “rape”

Your comments are not particularly welcome here. Rape is a serious offense and it is incredibly traumatizing for it’s victims. I have removed all of your comments, links and have blocked your account before you post any more comments which would cause pain to real victims of real crimes.

And real victims of real rape get confused with “victims” that consented to fondling!? That is demeaning. And the “perpetrator” of consensual acts then gets gang-raped in prison, because of a pervasive attitude that (falsely convicted) rapists deserve getting raped. That is pain to real victims of real prison rape.

‘Women’s rights at change.org perpetuate manipulative language distortion to foster feminist political goals

It is essential for a witch hunt that dissent gets silenced, made taboo.  Change.org’s feminist watchdogs invoke emotional terms (“cause real pain to real victims of real crimes”) in order to avoid discussing the issues and silence dissent easily.  This is the central issue of Human-Stupidity.com: how Taboos, Dogmas, Religion make even the Intelligent blind, irrational, “stupid”. And self deception makes the censor believe s/he is a liberal person.

Thus, of course, the real pain caused to real victims of witch hunts is totally ignored.  Guys who spend years in jail for consensual sex with an adolescent, or for a unproven false rape accusation. And who get special attention from prison rapists who like to prey on alleged rapists in order to exert cruel and usual punishment.

But my main issue here is not even sex laws. It is manipulative Abuse of Language to deceive the masses. The concerted world wide conspiracy to use the word “rape” for “seducing an adolescent” or for “indecently fondling a minor”. And the perverted inversion of due legal process. Alleged sex offenders are “guilty until proven innocent” and any accusation by a lone alleged victim is taken as proof of a crime.

Change.org dispute: full text follows here

Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading ‘Change.org sucks: "womens rights" feminists censor & silence dissent’ » »
Change.org sucks: "womens rights" feminists censor &… » continues here »

Abused Language: When a “rape” is not a rape

“Fondling a child”, or “consensual sex with an adolescent” nowadays can be called “rape”, in press reports, even in legal code (“statutory rape”).
This purposeful confusion created by the dilusion of the word “rape” helps to whip up punishment frenzy for crimes of “adolescent seduction” or “child fondling” at the expense of banalizing real forceful violent penetrating non-consensual rape.

So the word “rape” is abusively re-defined to serve an agenda: to make smaller transgressions look like heinous crimes.

The entire World Press,  the United Nations, everyone swallowed the bait and became manipulated! Amazing!

Similarly,  “adolescent nudity” no can be called “child porn”.  Defining 17 year olds as children has the collateral effect that now there is no word for real children of 12 and under, as there is no word  left for real rape.  This confusion must have a manipulative motive, as there is no logical need to change the meaning of words that had a clear definition for centuries.

Real meaning of the word “rape”

What do most people understand by the word “rape”? What was the meaning of “rape” for centuries? Non-consensual intercourse with penetration, usually involving violence or threats.

In criminal law, rape is an assault by a person involving sexual intercourse with another person without that person’s consent. Outside of law, the term is often used interchangeably with sexual assault,[1][2][3] a closely related (but in most jurisdictions technically distinct) form of assault typically including rape and other forms of non-consensual sexual activity.[4][5]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape

A criminal offense defined in most states as forcible sexual relations with a person against that person’s will.

Rape is the commission of unlawful sexual intercourse or unlawful sexual intrusion. Rape laws in the United States have been revised over the years, and they vary from state to state.

Historically, rape was defined as unlawful sexual intercourse with a woman against her will. The essential elements of the crime were sexual penetration, force, and lack of consent. Women who were raped were expected to have physically resisted to the utmost of their powers or their assailant would not be convicted of rape.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/rape

Barman freed despite admitting raping 12 year old girl

A barman who admitted raping a 12 year old girl he met through a social networking site has walked free from court after convincing a judge he was tricked into believing she was 19. Barman freed despite admitting raping 12 year old girl (telegraph.co.uk)
Man who had sex with girl, 12, admits rape but is freed after woman judge says he was ‘duped’ into thinking she was 19

Shocking, is it not? He raped a girl and was set free because he was mistaken about her age! It is ok to rape a girl if she is 19 years old?

Well, he did not REALLY rape her. If she is 19 years old then consensual sex, initiated by the girl who brought the condoms, is not called rape.  Dear Reader, haven’t you understood that any sex with a 12 year old is rape?  Our language has changed in the last 25 years! But, of course, this is on purpose. Once you understand that rape is not rape, the intended shock effect gets lost.

So the 12 year old was eager to have sex with him, actively initiated sex and purposefully deceived the barman into thinking that she was 19.  So, miraculously, he was freed. Doesn’t sound so shocking any more.

See Why I hate statutory Rape Laws | A Public Defender

After breaking marriage vow, sex becomes rape

Having a sexual relationship with a woman with a false promise of marriage can also be termed as rape. The case was being heard in a Delhi Court and it involved a man having sexual intercourse with his neighbour. The man was found guilty of rape and sentenced to seven years of rigorous imprisonment.

In the present case, Chhotey Lal, the convict and father of six children, had eloped with his neighbour in New Delhi in September 2004, and took her to far away places like Jaipur and Chandigarh. According to the girl, the duo established sexual relations after Lal assured her that he would marry her ‘very soon’. Meanwhile, the girl’s father lodged a ‘missing’ report with the police. The police detained Lal and the girl in March 2005 at Sarai Kale Khan Bus Terminal when they were returning to Delhi. Chhotey Lal was prosecuted for abducting the girl and having sexual relationships with her on false pretext.

“The so-called consent under a false promise to marriage is no consent,” additional sessions judge Mahavir Singhal said.

Highlighting the difference between ‘will’ and ‘consent’, the court said that a nod for sexual relations obtained by a man on the false pretext would not amount to a ‘legal or valid’ consent to save him from punishment for rape.

The Court observed that, even if the woman is assumed to be a willing partner in having a physical relationship, that the accused had no intention to marry her would make it a case where consent was given under misconception of facts, nullifying the efficacy of the nod.
Rape by promising marriage in India

Adolescent raped repeatedly?

Due to the language confusion, we really can not know if she was raped, or more likely, seduced. But most women don’t get raped repeatedly on various days.

In 1997, 15-year-old Tina Anderson became pregnant after being raped repeatedly by an older man she knew from church. Shockingly, when her pastor found out, he forced her to apologize in front of the entire congregation in Concord, New Hampshire, and then promptly helped whisk her away to live in Colorado.

According to Tina, the first time she was raped by Ernest Willis, it was in the backseat of car after he’d given her a driving lesson. She didn’t tell anyone because she was terrified that she’d be blamed. After being raped by Willis again, Tina became pregnant.
http://womensrights.change.org/blog/view/ teenager_forced_to_apologize_to_her_church_for_being_raped

Did she get “raped” or seduced? we don’t know

What does the average reader of this article think? They guy attacked the girl in a dark alley and had sex with her under the threat of violence.  Strange, though, that he raped her repeatedly on different days.
Now it is amazing that feminists and moralists managed to put such manipulative language even into penal codes. It is easier to promote your agenda with misleading language. “Teenager forced to appologize for being seduced” does not sound so shocking.  The word manipulation must  be planned and purposeful.
http://human-stupidity.com/irrationality/stupid-dogma/teenage-sexuality
http://human-stupidity.com/irrationality/stupid-dogma/child-porn-witch-hunt

Language confusion obfuscates facts

So no matter if you think sex with underage should be punished, I hope you agree that the truth should be said and that manipulative language should be abolished.
By the way, Ernest Willis is a child rapist. Because according to new definitions of child pornography, a child now is anyone under 18. The United Nations, the US, and Europe have adopted that definition.

Whoppi Goldberg differentiates “rape-rape” and non-violent so called “rape”

Hollywood has rallied behind Roman Polanski after his arrest in Switzerland over the weekend, with the actor Whoopi Goldberg suggesting that whatever he was guilty of it wasn’t “rape-rape”.

As a guest on The View chatshow on US television, she said: “I know it wasn’t rape-rape. It was something else but I don’t believe it was rape-rape. He went to jail and and when they let him out he was like, ‘You know what, this guy’s going to give me a hundred years in jail. I’m not staying.’ So that’s why he left.”

Polanski was not guilty of ‘rape-rape’, says Whoopi Goldberg

Age discimination: why is a 15 year old capable to consent to sex with a 16 year old but not with a 35 year old?

Then we can disagree on the last point: if a 15 year old can decide who to have sex with. Interestingly, she can decide to have sex with a 16 year old. How come she cannot have sex with a 35 year old? Age discrimination by law?

Mandatory psychological counselling before underage sex?

Are you worried about manipulation of the tender 15 year old? what about legalizing sex with underage girls, if they first undergo an hour of mandatory counselling and a 2 day cool off period? That should take care of this issue. This would guarantee safety for the 15 year old against being conned or manipulated. And it would be a good idea even for sex between consenting teenagers. So there would be no age discrimination!

Click on “more” for the rest of the story ……..

Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading ‘Definition of “Rape”: When a “Rape” is not a Rape! The Abuse of the word “Rape” & the Perversion of Language’ » »
Definition of “Rape”: When a “Rape” is not… » continues here »

Subscribe to Human-Stupidity Blog

Receive an email notification whenever Human-Stupidity.com has a new post.