Republicans re-re-define rape: to the original definition rape had for 2000 years before re-definition 30 years ago

Redefining rape: all feminists are up in arms. Feminists re-defined rape 30 years ago, and now republicans want to re-re-redefine rape to the original definition. The definition "rape" had since the old Romans and Greek before Christ was born. 

This bill takes us back to a time when just saying ‘no’ wasn’t enough to qualify as rape," says Steph Sterling, a lawyer and senior adviser to the National Women’s Law Center.
(The House GOP’s Plan to Redefine Rape)

And when being too young for sex were not called "rape" either, kissing a minor was not called rape either. In the old times, when language still had its own precise terminology, like "indecent act with a minor". And when the age of consent was lower, so 17 year olds enjoying sex were not "rape victims". As ‘Whoppie Goldberg called it "it was not real rape-rape".

Human-Stupidity Analysis

We are language semantics freaks: we don’t like that one word defines 2 different things. Not every killing is murder, and not every problematic sex act is rape.

Readers might disagree, if a irresponsible teen who got herself pregnant should get free abortion. Or if it is better to get an, even undeserved, abortion then the prospect of an immature poor mother traumatizing a baby. Or one might wonder why the immature teen girl that got pregnant from an immature teen boy the same age was not statutorily raped and thus does not deserve a free abortion.   But if she had a relationship with a more sensible, responsible, mature man, then she was statutorily raped and deserves a free abortion.


The House GOP’s Plan to Redefine Rape

Rape is only really rape if it involves force. So says the new House Republican majority as it now moves to change abortion law. […]

Republicans propose that the rape exemption be limited to "forcible rape." This would rule out federal assistance for abortions in many rape cases, including instances of statutory rape, many of which are non-forcible. For example: If a 13-year-old girl is impregnated by a 24-year-old adult, she would no longer qualify to have Medicaid pay for an abortion.[…]

"This bill takes us back to a time when just saying ‘no’ wasn’t enough to qualify as rape," says Steph Sterling, a lawyer and senior adviser to the National Women’s Law Center.[..]

Other types of rapes that would no longer be covered by the exemption include rapes in which the woman was drugged or given excessive amounts of alcohol, rapes of women with limited mental capacity, and many date rapes. "There are a lot of aspects of rape that are not included," Levenson says.

Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Republicans re-re-define rape: to the original definition rape had for 2000 years before re-definition 30 years ago” »
Republicans re-re-define rape: to the original definition rape had…
» continues here »

Age of Consent is Misandry (

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. This is only possible in a society that values females over males, the same society that has so many other examples of legalized discrimination based on sex as long as that sex is male – violence laws such as VAWA, domestic violence laws, family court, accusations of sexual assault & harassment, all criminal sentencing, military conscription, circumcision, etc. We live in a society where misandry runs rampant, unchecked, and enforced by the law.


Jay Hammers closed down his famous Men’s Rights blog, for private reasons. Unfortunately, he did not just cease to publish, but took down the entire blog. With Jay Hammers gracious permission, I repost Jay Hammers “Age of Consent is Misandry”.

Jay Hammer’s “Age of Consent is Misandry” is a provocative, politically incorrect and irreverent article. The language is often strong and alienated even lots Men’s Rights’ activists.

We at repost  Jay Hammer’s “Age of Consent is Misandry” as a historical document, without further comment. We do invite comments at the end of this post!

  • has the history of his blog, including lots of reddit’s members comments. We would be happy if Jay Hammers gave permission to repost more of his articles.
  • is not exclusively dedicated to men’s rights. Human Stupidity focuses on exposing blind dogmatism, unjust witch hunts and wants to raise awareness and honest conscious discussion. Sometimes the truth is offensive, sometimes a point that counters conventional dogma can be driven home with blunt openness instead of careful maneuvering.
  • * r/mensrightsmovement: Reddit Men’s Rights Movement

    • is a new group at reddit, and an appropriate place to advance the discussion of issues about this post. r/MensRightMovementWelcomes sex positive points of view” and “Sees the legislative creep of sex offender hysteria to be one of the greatest abuses of men’s rights by feminists.”

    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.

    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. In the first case, the male appears to be of higher value than he really is because he is older and more experienced. In the second case, the male appears to be of higher value than he really is because he has learned the elements of attraction. In both cases, women are presumed (by feminists) to have no responsibility for their own actions and to be little more than children, than animals who are guided only by instinct.

    Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading “Age of Consent is Misandry (” »
    Age of Consent is Misandry (
    » continues here »

    Sex laws traumatize 14 year old school boy who was happy to have affair with 26 year old woman

    A mother-of-two caught naked in bed with a 14-year-old schoolboy who bragged about the affair on Facebook has been jailed.  Susanne Divers, 26, befriended the boy after meeting him at a party and later began an affair that lasted more than a month. He was so smitten he boasted on the website: ‘I’ve got the best girl in the world.’— Read more: Mother of two, 26, is jailed after being caught naked in bed with 14-year-old schoolboy lover (Daily Mail)

    It is pretty clear how this 14 year old boy was damaged by the woman predator. So much that he bragged all over, and wanted to commit suicide when she tried to break up. The repressive teenage sex laws were to blame for the breakup attempts. So the laws actually are detrimental to teenagers.

    Over 200 comments to the above article agree mainly that the law is wrong. Most commenters would not have the courage to say that the law is also wrong if the “victim” were female happily agreeing and consenting to a relationship with an older guy.

    If society were not so totally convinced by the dogma of gender equality, then it would even be worth analyzing if there should be different measures for both sexes. Some fathers might actually be proud if their 14 year old son had an affair with a 26 year old woman, but most parents would be much more concerned if their 14 year old daughter had an affair with a 26 year old man. Maybe human instinct is a better guide then equality laws.

    Food for thought.  Form your own opinion.

    Disclaimer (Female privileges or equality)

    My comment in the left column did not intend to alienate men’s rights activists. But I got flak by some highley esteemed activists who thought I was betraying them because am favoring privileges for women.

    This quick comment was a suggestion to open-mindedly consider different alternative thoughts, not a dogmatic statement or final solution. Human-Stupidity is about awareness and anti-dogmatic attitude, not about definite dogmatic solutions.

    See also the comments below for alternative ideas and interpretations.

    I am not in defending the the actual system:

    • whenever it behooves women, they have equal rights
    • whenever it is advantageous, they have unequal privileges

    Rather, in order to have old fashioned female privileges in one place, they would have to accept old fashioned male privileges elsewhere. Actually

    • I am against the dogma of the sexes being totally equal (they are not)
    • I am against excessive, unnecessary and draconic interference by law makers and courts into private matters, sexuality

    See yesterday’s post about the father who castrated his teenage daughter’s lover.