*Before you read the following article, here are several recent must read articles revealing the disturbing thoughts of the (real) child abuse apologist David Futrelle :
David Futrelle – Feminists fighting child sex slavery used ‘coercive strategies to control the sexual behaviour of young girls’.
David Futrelle – Women and child victims of abuse should take more responsibility for their abuse because their innocence is ‘exaggerated’.
David Futrelle – Films that consist entirely of 14 and 15 year old children being sexually abused, made to eat shit, mutilated, raped, and murdered, can be great art AND sold in gay sex shops.
The Men’s Rights Movement support of feminist age of consent laws can be compared to the Black Civil Rights Movement supporting the interracial sex laws made by white men.
Of course, the black civil rights movement did no such thing, and under no concievable circumstance could they ever be so immoral and stupid to do so.
Yet…we here at this site (and a handful of others) are in a minority when we say that men’s rights activists should not support the jailing of men for having sex with girls under the feminist age of consent, anymore than a supporter of black civil rights should support the jailing of black men for having interracial sex with a white female.
I would urge again all my readers to spread the knowledge that present day age of consent laws are almost entirely the work of feminists – from their origin in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, to their present day ever more draconian application and accompanying hysteria.
Here are a few useful facts to spread as far and wide as possible in 2014, both within the manosphere and without :
The age of consent in the UK was raised from 13 to 16 in a backward Victorian Criminal Law Act passed in 1885 – lobbied for largely by feminists.
That same backward Victorian feminist bill criminalized not only prostitution as well, but also homosexuality. In fact anything that appeared to threaten or lower the sexual market value of the average woman.
It was a similar story in the USA and other anglo-saxon and European countries – with puritanical suffragettes campaigning furiously for the age of consent to be raised, alongside laws against prostitution and homosexuality..
Alan Turing was convicted by the same act of parliament that raised the age of consent from 13 to 16. The feminists who lobbied for that bill had actually sought an age of consent of 21. We recently pardoned Alan Turing for having sex with a 19 year old (when he was 42), and now regard his persecution as a shameful episode in our moral history.
Anti-feminists of the Victorian/Edwardian era, including the first men’s rights activist Ernest Belfort Bax, opposed the raising of the age of consent on the grounds that it would criminalize ordinary male sexuality.
These early men’s rights supporters also pointed out the absurdity of feminists demanding that 18 year old women be given the vote and yet claiming that teenage girls and young women were incapable of making their mind up about sex, requiring state protection from men. Increasingly today, feminist dominated left-wing parties are lowering the voting age to 16 and yet at the same time effectively raising the age of consent to 18 or even beyond.
It is not possible to be neutral regarding what the correct age of consent should be. The age of consent is not a ‘speeding test’, as feMRA apologists in the MHRM have claimed. It involves forcing the traumatic and damaging ‘abuse victim label’ upon boys and girls below that age, even if they had sex willingly. MRAs who support the forcing of the ‘abuse victim label’ upon teenage boys and girls are doing so on the basis of feminist laws, arguments, and junk science. In other words, unless you believe that somehow feminists have ‘got it right’ on just this one issue, then MRAs who support the feminist age of consent are child abusers who damage and victimise children.
At the very least, ALL men’s rights supporters should accept that certain issues involved with the age of consent are undoubtedly men’s rights issues. These include the ‘strict liability’ that feminists fought so long and hard to achieve and which has jailed so many men for having sex with girls who lied about their age, and also the continuing feminist campaign to raise still further the age of consent to 18 or even 21 and older.
And to briefly answer the simple-minded objection that the age of consent is not a men’s rights issue so long as it applies equally to both men and women – this is equality of injustice at its most backward (and hurtful to men, and boys)! Interracial sex laws often applied to both black AND white men (for example, in apartheid South Africa), but it was manifestly apparent that the laws were aimed at black men, because it was (and is) more natural and more common for a black man to pursue a white woman than it is for a white man to pursue a black woman. In the same way, it is more natural and common, for basic reasons of evolutionary psychology, for men to pursue teenage girls than it is for women to pursue teenage boys. Furthermore, black civil rights leaders would not be so stupid to accept that interracial sex laws were fair, so long as they applied equally to both black men and white men.
This is why, when feminists restrict and punish normal male sexuality, it is and always will be a men’s rights issue, and those who deny this are either stupid, fraudulent, or simply cowards.