“In defense of Pedophilia” attacks the age of consent taboo topic, regarding sex with 17 year old “children” in typical judgmental judgybitch fashion (Disclaimer).
So I ended up in this completely retarded conversation on Facebook in reference to this case in Sweden, in which a 27 year old had sex with a very physically mature 13 year old whom he thought was much older. Sweden, believe it or not, is relatively sane about this sort thing, and refused to prosecute the man for “child rape”. In defense of Pedophilia
In the USA “statutory rape” 17 year old children is a *strict liability crime. You had sex with a minor, it is “rape”.
There is absolutely no excuse. If she is 17 years and 364 days old, and she forced herself onto you while you were passed out drunk, if s/he showed you a valid ID emitted by a US government entity proving s/he is over 18, all that does not change the fact that s/he was “raped”.
Age of consent laws
It is perfectly legitimate to think
- “Sex at a young age is unwise”
- “I don’t want my young daughter to have sex”
This is very different from Age of consent laws that imply that
- under all circumstances, with no exception, a sex act with a person under the age of consent is considered terrible enough to warrant heavy handed government intervention.
Thanks to the Antifeminist (author of the sexual trade union theory) for having called my attention to JudgyBitch – ‘In “defence” of pedophilia’. It is also worth reading the very open minded comments in in defense of Pedophilia.
Science does not support Age of consent laws
Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “In defense of Pedophilia” »
In defense of Pedophilia
» continues here »