Try to guess what the blogger at The Truth Shall Set You Free, a blog that describes itself as “an examination of all issues related to comparative religion and the attempt to find truth in the world today” is talking about here. (Hint: It’s not drugs.)
“We are going to let drug dealers set up stands on every street corner, with glitzy advertising, and they will be allowed to offer their illegal drugs, for free, to anyone who walks by. But if anyone takes them up on their offer of free drugs, we will arrest the receiver and send them to prison. Even if the seller advertised a legal drug, but the receiver took an illegal one unknowingly.”
Well, I probably gave it away with the title and the illustration, but yes, he’s talking about age of consent laws. We’re back on that subject again, thanks to the inability of manosphere douchebags to stop talking about it in extremely icky ways. The “dealer” here is, of course, the underage girl. The drug in question … is also the underage girl. The unwary buyer? The poor, helpless, and outrageously oppressed male of the species. I’ll let our high-minded Christian blogger explain:
Criminalizing consensual sex with willing 16 year olds is absurd. Consent is consent.
The bias of the law is revealed by considering this: If both parties consented to breaking the law, why aren’t both parties punished? …
Uh, because the law is designed to protect underage girls and boys from older predators? Because we as a society recognize that consent is really not consent when one of the “consenting” partners is underage and the other is much older?
But no, our thoughtful student of comparative religion seems convinced that the purpose of the law is, well, I’m not sure what he thinks the purpose is other than to harsh the buzz of older men in thrall to evil, devious, conniving teenage girls.
In his mind, teen girls are the equivalent of drug dealers and older men are hapless, helpless addicts:
-The dealers (young women) are allowed to advertise (through clothes, makeup, body-language) an extremely valuable and addictive commodity (sex), and in fact, they can give it away totally free, without fear of any penalty…
–but if a customer (man) takes that heavily-advertised and freely-given valuable commodity, he is committing a felony.
And that’s the case, he complains, even if the girl lies about her age!
–even if he had no knowledge that her drug was illegal (underage), even [if] she misrepresented the commodity as legal, he is solely at fault.
–The consumer (man) is sent to prison, and forced to register as a sex offender FOR LIFE
–The dealer (young woman) is allowed to walk free to continue to entrap other potential customers of her illegal commodity.
A clearer example of the infamous “pussy pass” couldn’t not be conceived. What these laws are really doing is punishing men for girls being sluts and/or liars.
And so the oppression of men by evil women and girls continues apace. But there is, our blogger insists, a simple solution to this terrible injustice:
Punish the girls who are providing!
Clearly it is unfair to expect men to be able to resist the lures of these conniving Lolitas. We must do something to protect innocent men from underage sluts slutting it up in public!
Ah, don’t bother to reply to that. Since David has made clear that he doesn’t want me here, I will now go to the MRA forums and troll them. And if I do it right, David will pick up my trolls there, will think they are all real and will try to mock them here and gets trolled, too.
That’s what I would call…
DOUBLE TROLLED!
There’s a pretty subtle imho well constructed troll hidden in the other thread… it has something to do with the letter “h” … don’t fall for it.
PS: What’s that above? Concern trolling or normal trolling…? do I want to sow FUD that the stuff David mocks might not be real? You decide…
Marc: So.. with a 46 percent recidivism rate in 3 years… vs. a 3.5, and a consistent trend of 3.5… you fail to show the persistent rate of recidivism on the part of non-sexual offenders.
You still fail to show that sexual offenders are a greater threat to society.
While pretending you have.
That’s dishonest.
Oh my god!!!! Marc’s a troll???
*dies from shock*
Marc, here’s the thing, the comments and posts I quote from MRA sites are those THAT OTHER COMMENTERS on those sites AGREE WITH — ie, other people upvote them, they say “great post,” the commenter in question has posted literally hundreds of other comments there and is liked by the other commenters, etc. Even in the unlikely event that these comments were posted by trolls, they reflect widely held beliefs, and/or the “conventional wisdom” of those sites.
By contrast, your “let’s kill all the men” comments here were violently rejected by everyone here because they do not reflect what we think in the slightest; they’re horrible, and people here keep saying that they’re horrible.
If someone were to troll the sites I quote from in a similar manner, and they got a similar response, I wouldn’t quote their comments, because they would not reflect widely held MRA/MGTOW beliefs.
When I quote something horribly misogynistic and there are some people at the site who disagree, I generally point this out, because it is fairly rare.
I’m no fan of the Men’s rights reddit, obviously, but there are some people who post there who challenge the misogyny there, and I point this out all the time.
Also, feel free to continue commenting here, just drop the ridiculous, dishonest, obnoxious, and highly repetitive trolling. You’re not banned, just on moderation.
By contrast, your “let’s kill all the men” comments here were violently rejected by everyone here because they do not reflect what we think in the slightest; they’re horrible, and people here keep saying that they’re horrible.
Please, David, violently rejected? They were polite and said “We don’t want that” but they weren’t that shocked. It’s not one of the things that gets their blood boiling.
By contrast, your “let’s kill all the men” comments here were violently rejected by everyone here because they do not reflect what we think in the slightest; they’re horrible, and people here keep saying that they’re horrible.
Your faith shows its true colors under pressure. It is the pathological desire to blame all of the ills of one group of people on a different group – externalizing your emotions and whatnot. It would be understandable and perhaps even rational if feminists were just about removing prejudiced legislation, but enacting prejudiced legislation? The MRM has come into existence for a reason – when your legislation enables the sincere consideration of boys becoming sex offenders for a game, someone has to clean up the mess.
@Marc:
“Please, David, violently rejected? They were polite and said “We don’t want that” but they weren’t that shocked. It’s not one of the things that gets their blood boiling.”
I don’t supposed its the same reason why nobody gets “their blood boiling” over NWO’s screed… There’s absolutely no reason to give you any sort of credence, and you could advocate raping small children and some of us wouldn’t blink an eye. It isn’t what you say, it’s pretty much just you.
Marc wrote, “Yes do that, cuddle him, cuddle him as long as you still can!”
Is he threatening my BF here, or mad that I didn’t provide him with wank material? o.O
He also wrote, “Please, David, violently rejected? They were polite and said “We don’t want that” but they weren’t that shocked. It’s not one of the things that gets their blood boiling.”
Wait… now that Marc has revealed he’s just trollin’, he’s annoyed we didn’t take him seriously? Let me laugh harder.
FF, I love that your favorite source to prove what misandrists we supposedly are is a link to hate mail received by a web site devoted to the notion that “men are better than women.”
Oh, David, you are so delightfully naive. Do you think that what he writes forces angry, man-hating feminists to orally assault him? There is even a warning on the front page which explicitly states that if it is not for you, David, do not read it.
Your faith shows its true colors under pressure. Do you care to acknowledge that a disproportionate number of his assailants are feminists, or would you prefer to step down?
Marc: What do you want? Shall we say anyone who tries it will be tarred and feathered, propped up with pitchforks and used as bonfires while we dance around their agonies in glee?
Fine, you don’t like violently as a modifier, how about vehemently, or utterly, or totally, or universally. Because everyone who has responded to your “not-wiping them out, just phasing them out in slow gendercide”, has said it’s poinltess, inane, and morally repugnant.
I think that’s a total rejection.
Then again, it’s a gedankenexperiment. You admit you aren’t actually in favor of it. Which means you had some other agenda. Forgive me if I think it wasn’t wholesome, nor honest.
I think what really chaps your hide is that we aren’t foaming at the mouth, and raving about what a loon you are, but rather pointing out your lying ways. Some of us are merely mocking you. It’s gotta suck to be a trollus officianalis and fail to get people really angry.
I mean all that work, and what you get is gently dismembered. Sad really. Like I said, if you want to be a player in the big leagues, you need better game.
“Do you think that what he writes forces angry, man-hating feminists to orally assault him?”
Heh.
factfinder: When he’s spewing screeds against a group, that’s the group I’d expect to be responding.
If he were bashing gays you’d be here talking about the hate male proves that all of them are hateful.
Using your methods the trolls and hate male of Man Boobz shows that MRAs are hateful.
It’s not a valid metric.
Moreover, we don’t know what percentage of that is legitimate or trolling (it’s not as if he doesn’t have an agenda, nor that people in the pursuit of an agenda wouldn’t lie… see NWO, or Eoghan, or Marc). For all you know most feminists ignore him (if they’ve heard of him) and it’s all of half a dozen playing at “Sprezzatura”, or, “Planned Chaos”.
Heck, he could be making it all up.
XD
Marc is a liar. His “kill all the men” bull shit has been called out for trolling but it has also been referred to as disgusting, obscene, horrible, and multiple other pejoratives.
Nobody tracked down is ISP address or tried to send him personal email, pitch forks a-blazin’, and now we didn’t take it seriously enough? We weren’t properly outraged by this bull shit?
Hi there, Factfinder. Did you get that blood test yet? If so, please post a copy of it on Manboobz so we can ensure that your hormone levels are nice and balanced. If you can’t prove that your hormones are within the normal range, I’m afraid we’re just going to have to discount all of your arguments as irrational and hormonal.
“Do you think that what he writes forces angry, man-hating feminists to orally assault him?”
This is awesome. I only read through the first few letters. Did someone actually yell at Dick Masterson?
Or bite him?
How angry are we supposed to get about a troll who is known to posit things he doesn’t believe, and is nothing more than a weird thought experiment? xD
Ami: We have ladybrainz, so we are supposed to flip-out and get irrational. Violent even.
I mean he was talking about Rapists.. the worst of the worst.
A clearer example of the infamous “pussy pass” couldn’t not be conceived. What these laws are really doing is punishing men for girls being sluts and/or liars.
You know, I’m not ashamed to admit I laughed out loud at that. Really?
What I find especially amusing is that this is the predominant view promulgated by every fucking misogynist religion out there. It’s the basis of the entire face veil/burka/women are sluts if they show any skin at all bullshit zeitgeist that comes from the (mis)reading of the Quran.
As a man, I support the extinction of the male half of the specie.
People like this are an embarrassment, and frankly, incapable of redemption.
If he were bashing gays you’d be here talking about the hate male proves that all of them are hateful.
Using your methods the trolls and hate male of Man Boobz shows that MRAs are hateful.
“Hate male”… this Freudian slip (well, “slip”… you even made it twice) clearly shows what you think about your gender.
As a man, I support the extinction of the male half of the specie.
Do you want it others to do it for you or do you want to participate in it?
Is he threatening my BF here, or mad that I didn’t provide him with wank material? o.O
We spoke about the extinction of the male half of the species… who do you think we threaten?
Yet she’s still not afraid for her boyfriend, but for herself:
“Ironically, now that I’m done laughing and Marc is now making the argument in at least two threads I’ve got a well-nigh overwhelming urge to cuddle my boyfriend. It’s what I do when I feel the need to hide from the crazy. 😛
If she would actually care for him she would have written:
“I’ve got a well-nigh overwhelming urge to cuddle my boyfriend. It’s what I do when I feel the need to hide him from the crazy. 😛
That’s the thing I feel most sorry for straight men, I’m afraid, if you will be in danger one day, your wife or gf (you protected all the time) will just think for herself and run (and after 30 min she might feel a bit of remorse that she didn’t at least call 911).
The other things are just a nuisance but that must hurt one to his heart.
ah… Marc: The thing you ought to feel sorry for gay men about is that they are interested in men, since you say you think men are predisposed to rape; ergo the homosexual men will want to rape too, and the objects of their desires will be… other men.
Unless of course you are being dishonest.
Most of the world — including most states in the US — does set the age of consent at 16, although some US states place provisos on consent at 16 that are lifted at 18. The wildly-held-in-the-US idea that 18 is some magical universal age of consent comes from most of our media being produced in California, where this is the case.
I will post the link when I find it but I agree with that blogger over at inmalafide that if where going to enforce these laws fairly than have the same punishments for the Teens invoved.