Legalize rape


When rape first became a crime, we lived in a different world. Among the middle and upper echelons of society, women expected to be virgins at marriage and to be respectable in public thereafter.

These expectations arose from common knowledge which has been forgotten. Without the bonding that sexual inexperience provided, couples lacked the trust that came with shared exclusive experience. Their marriages also became unions of convenience, not based on the sacred but in business-like negotiations for mutual satisfaction on a day-to-day basis.

Not surprisingly when we abandoned this outlook our fortunes fell as far as marriage is concerned. First infidelity swept through marriages, then divorce became common, and now people simply avoid marriage in the first place to avoid being penalized to subsidize someone else after the inevitable divorce. Marriage is like extended dating at this point.

In saner times, rape ruined a woman. If it occurred before marriage, it made her unlikely to become married; if it happened afterwards, people saw her as being ejected from the throes of marital contentment. (This was for decent people in the upper echelons: peasants, criminals and gypsies rutted like pigs and still do, which creates their ever-expanding numbers and ever-decreasing fortune.)

In our new age however rape no longer carries this weight. No woman is ruined by having sex with one more man, since they commonly have sex with six of them on average that they will admit, but we know that people lie on surveys and the actual number may be ten times higher, some without even knowing his name or spending more than a dozen minutes in his company. At this point, it is farce and injustice to keep rape classified as a crime of violence.

Rather, we should view rape as a form of theft. We know that the woman intended to have sex with someone because she does it on a regular basis; what happened instead was that she had sex with the wrong man. It occurred not by force, since we no longer require that to prosecute a man for rape, but by mistake. She said no and he heard yes, or she said yes and meant no, or (as is most common) both had to get so drunk to engage in the animalistic act that neither knew what the other said and in the haze of regret the next day, she decided it was rape.

But no matter: In all of these cases, the only crime was theft of sexual services. She could have sold that sexual encounter for anywhere from a few dollars to a few thousand. Perhaps it was wrong that he took her as he did, but we have worse physical affronts in car crashes and when people crash their shopping carts into us at Wal-mart. As with an auto accident, we could write him a ticket and slap a heft fine on him, then move on.

It is not as if anything permanent were taken from that woman. She is already accustomed to having sex with strangers. She does not expect to be virginal for marriage, but fears being virginal past age thirteen, as socially that means failure. The only real crime here is that the wrong man ended up having sex with her, or that he did not pay. Our legal system offers many ways to rectify this. If he is ticketed, she can sue in small claims court much as she would if he took her paid parking space for a month.

But what we must not do is use the old punishment and the new crime in the same action. Rape is no longer a violent crime, but a case of mistaken consent, like parking in spot 81 when you rented spot 82. We should not punish it like grand larceny, assault and murder. As the feminists tell us, most rapes are acquaintance rape. And for that, a quick ticket and a sharp fine should do the trick, and we can stop ruining the lives of men for regrets in a sexual marketplace of the lowest common denominator.

Tags: , ,

48 Responses to “Legalize rape”

  1. Steve says:

    Rape insurance would provide a woman with compensation for services she claims were taken without payment.

    Of course if she makes too many false claims, the insurance company will drop her.

  2. Hank says:

    MAN (to woman seated next to him at an elegant dinner party): Would you sleep with me for ten million dollars?

    WOMAN (giggles and responds): Oh, of course I would.

    MAN: How about doing it for fifteen dollars?

    WOMAN (indignant): Why, what do you think I am?

    MAN: That’s already been established. Now we’re just haggling about the price.

  3. Boreal says:

    It’s funny how feminism works.

    They want to pick and choose – the picking and choosing being determined by feelings instead of actual thought processes.

    They want to avail themselves of the societal protection that in sane times would be only available to a virgin girl.
    In short, feminists want all the benefits of being a man/moral female while eschewing the responsibilities and duties of the man/moral female. How many women do you hear complaining that all coal miners are men and therefore demand a 1:1 employment ratio? None. How many women that frequent bars/clubs complain about “rape culture”? Too many.

    They want feelings instead of logic/common sense/sound precedent to be the basis of law. If a woman is walking down the street and a man grabs her and touches her, any sane man would conclude that that is harassment. But not so fast! In girl-land, it depends. Was he Hawt? If yes, then it’s ok. Was he “creepy” or “weird”, well, then off with his head!

    This is why men need to be the rulers of nations – not women/gays.

  4. Meow Mix says:

    That’s the sound of SJW heads exploding. This article should be plastered all over Tumblr.

  5. basto says:

    Sharing this piece should help trim your “friends” list on social networks.

  6. cityofjinn says:

    Shockingly hilarious

  7. 1349 says:

    peasants, criminals and gypsies rutted like pigs and still do, which creates their ever-expanding numbers

    Peasants? No!
    At least, the East European rural standard of a wife, until roughly the middle of the XX century, was a virgin at marriage and faith ’til death.

    Also, a man claiming that wives should be virgins at marriage, must realize that men will be so, too.

    • hughdecroft says:

      Even with the expectation of virginity at marriage, evidence suggests that premarital sex was still somewhat common in centuries past. Spend some time looking through European baptism records and you’ll find a surprising number of illegitimate births among the rural population.

      • 1349 says:

        you’ll find a surprising number of illegitimate births among the rural population.

        Which regions, which period, what percent?

    • Also, a man claiming that wives should be virgins at marriage, must realize that men will be so, too.

      I wondered if anyone would mention that. Glad you did.

  8. 1349 says:

    rutted like pigs and still do, which creates their ever-expanding numbers

    Today’s slutty humans do not grow in numbers. There’s contraception. Which makes the K- and R- strategies a bit irrelevant.

    • Adam says:

      I dunno spend some time at Walmart and you’ll see that many SHOULD be forced to use contraception.

  9. Theseus says:

    Brett, I can’t help but ask: Is this satire? While I agree with the general premise presented here (sex has lost its transcendent meaning and is now a crude materialist pursuit) the suggested solution strikes me as harmful and bizarre. We should teach people to wait until marriage for sex, instead of just saying “screw it” and actively encouraging men and women to sleep around and sexually assault each other. Besides, while many people are sluts, there are just as many who are still pure and moral, and we should reach out to them, supporting them for staying virtuous in a declining society. While I normally agree with nearly everything you say, this article strikes me as insane, and I can’t help but wonder if it’s supposed to be…

    • We should teach people to wait until marriage for sex, instead of just saying “screw it” and actively encouraging men and women to sleep around and sexually assault each other.

      This article is about the penalties for rape and how they should not be as extreme as they are. By implication, it addresses the issues you outline.

  10. 1349 says:

    This was for decent people in the upper echelons: peasants, criminals and gypsies rutted like pigs and still do, which creates their ever-expanding numbers

    In fact, maybe even the opposite is true in the case of today’s whites and “near-whites”, as You call us – because of universal contraception and regard of sex as just one of the pleasures.
    Those who are decent and faithful to their spouses, actually tend to have kids, sometimes many.
    Those who just rub their genitals for pleasure (a process of “masturbation into the partner”), tend to avoid having (many) kids.
    Or am i mistaken?

    When you have a technically & scientifically advanced society, you have to make every new generation study for a long period of time. Many a young person will enter a college or a university, and will have limited possibilities of having and sustaining a family while they are a student.
    But their reproductive system becomes active long before college/uni; their instincts actually make them look for a partner. Someone might also seek for something as banal as actual romance. =) But they’re unlikely to become partners for life while they’re students. What we get is, at best, a series of serious relationships in the high school/college/uni period. And only then – a marriage.

    Thus the population becomes increasingly selfish and infantile.
    By the age of 23-25 they’re sexually experienced but inexperienced in real love and management and sustaining of a family. The opposite would be a much better option.

    Something must be done about this.

    • What we get is, at best, a series of serious relationships in the high school/college/uni period. And only then – a marriage.

      This is most definitely a huge problem. It originates in our decision to place education before basic competence. Most skills are learned on the job anyway.

      • 1349 says:

        Complicated jobs require the knowledge of large amounts of theory. Can’t say for Western universities, but, for instance, among all of the disciplines that a Soviet electronics designer, or production engineer, or psychiatrist would study, there would be 80% of rather general subjects (such as general physics, various sections of chemistry and maths, principles of programming; a huge list of general medical disciplines, for doctors; philosophy, cultural anthropology, political science etc. etc.) and just about 20% of special, “job” subjects.
        A university must, like, teach about the Universe, after all. =) So that the future graduate would understand where his job is situated in the big picture of society and how it relates to other jobs. And how to “manage” this world, if needed.

        That the university must only accept those who really CAN learn all of this is another question.
        So we will still, inevitably, have people who study much and, most likely, for a long time. And the question is – how not to let this elite grow infantile & depraved.

        • 1349 says:


          Ok, post-Soviet rather than Soviet.
          But in general, the Soviets had this “universal” principle, too.

  11. […] suggest, in line with my article “Legalize Rape,” that we take a more realistic view. We should never knee-jerk believe the accusers because it makes […]

  12. stupid says:

    I’m with you in at least 60% of things. But you are wrong here.

    You think that because some women are degenerates then all women, even respectable women should be open to being raped?

    Your claim is ridiculous, unfair and leads nowhere.

    • Brian says:

      I’d say most women are degenerates, not some.

      • Bobby Barrett says:

        If she’ll put her mouth on your penis, she’s a degenerate.
        If she insists on the man licking her genitals, she’s a pervert.
        If she actually wants the man to stick his penis into her anus, she’s depraved and probably has one or more loathsome infections.

  13. […] article “Legalize Rape” met with widespread misinterpretation. Most of its critics did not read past the title, which is […]

  14. baba says:

    Better this: Lower the minimum age to marry to 14. Sex outside marriage should be discouraged. It USED to be normal in Western countries for people to marry young, until about 1 century ago. And it’s still normal in Asia, no matter what the laws there say. They just do it. I talked to many women in Asia and many of them had first sex very early. I had a girlfriend from the Philippines when she was 22. She told me she first had sex at 9 and she was in perfect mental and physical health. Always smiling. Asians are much more relaxed about sex. They don’t make all that stupid feminist drama like in the West. Western women are such drama queens and “victims” of everything. Blaming men for everything. They should go to Asia for a few years and then realize just how stupid their previous thinking was.

    • Sex outside marriage should be discouraged.

      I agree. This is what the West did right that Asia does not. Their women are a manosphere dream (penis slaves) but not faithful partners with which to find a spiritual bond and explore the world.

  15. Dyz says:

    Either this is satire or the author lacks empathy. It reads like “I want to rape but I do not like the punishment”.

    It is telling that the article focuses on male -> female rape and completely ignores male -> male rape and female -> male rape. If the author was repeatedly anally raped by another man (with enough money to pay the fines) would the author be OK with that? Would the author consider that theft or violence?

    The reactions are also telling; typical mysogynist stuff.

    And of course you guys think that disagrees with you is just beeing ’emotional’ because you think you are beeing ‘rational’. (Which merely shows your irrational preconceptions about feminists).

    I wish all of you, your family and friends endless anal rape.

    • It reads like “I want to rape but I do not like the punishment”.

      Actual thesis is: rape is no longer the crime we imagine it to be, so make it a property crime of mistaken consent unless actually paired with assault and battery.

      • Dyz says:

        No, the actual thesis is; “I (THE AUTHOR) THINK THAT rape is no longer the crime I (THE AUTHOR) THINK BACKWARD RETARDS imagine it to be, …”

        And exactly where does the author specify; “unless actually paired with assault and battery.”?

        I still think my description of this article is better; “I want to rape but I don’t like the punishment.”

        • Brian says:

          No, the description of this article is, “women are degenerates and the current punishment for rape is too severe.”

          • the current punishment for rape is too severe.

            At the very least, one would think detractors could read this from the text…

          • Whatever says:

            I think that, as a person who shows obvious indifference to the subject matter, you lack the ability to see the consequences of what you would bring into law.

            We could, for instance, legalize drunk driving, using the tired old argument “I can drink and drive without killing anyone, ergo we should only punish it after someone dies” and “Drunks are going to drink and drive anyways.”

            The problem is, preventative laws are slow peeling laws. Legalizing it today doesn’t give reliable statistics for the future; we have several generations of drunks who have grown accustomed to being penalized for drinking and driving that they now call cabs, have designated drivers, or leave their keys with the bartender.

            The point being that laws have to become accepted by the citizens for them to become effective; and the way you do that is by pushing the consequences of those laws to the extremes.

            Unfortunately, this also requires you to have the ability to CATCH the criminal; which if a person believes they won’t get caught, the punishment is not for the crime but getting caught.

            This may seem confusing as to how it relates, but my points above were two fold.

            Effective law requires:
            1) Acceptance of the law by society (often this takes large periods of time and can change over time as well)

            2) A societal “shame” for breaking the law (or other immediate consequences)

            The studies on rape show that the most common forms do not see it as rape. (Marital, Date, Drunk) hence we have the problem with “1”, and while Social Media offers a way to accomplish “2” the law can’t do much due to lack of evidence.

            While society WILL shame “stranger rape”, it still has the issue of recognizing the difference between “stranger rape” and “stranger con-sexual sex” due to “rape roleplay” or “rough sex” being popular.

            In truth, going so far as to say there is a case where a woman had a stranger break in her home, rape her, and call back and ask to be her boyfriend (which she recorded for the jury) after which the jury said “we just can’t be sure that he isn’t your boyfriend” and conclude “not rape” should show that the problem isn’t penalties, but that we just do not know, nor have a consensus on, what rape actually is.

            • Whatever says:

              In short, the problem is that feminists are trying to get society to take rape more seriously which hence leads to reduction and yadda yadda.

              They’re often extremists would violate everyone’s 6th amendment given the chance, but they’re impatient and trying to change societal views overnight.

              What should be brought to question isn’t the punishment, but what society accepts as rape because, right now, no one really knows.

  16. Anonymous says:

    …meanwhile, former footballer and convicted rapist Ched Evans:

    …I say ‘former’, because in the oh so manosphere world of British football, no football club will so much as touch him now. One club’s fans said they’d destroy the club if their management recruited Evans.

    If rape will never be legalised in Britain, and because of the attitudes of it’s male fans, then good luck in even thinking that rape will be ‘legalised’ anywhere else in civilised society.

    Ched Evans – because of his conviction – is now a pariah of British society. The only ones he can look down on are paedophiles.

    There’s an awful lot of what you refer to by the supposedly ‘perjorative’ term ‘SJW’s in the UK, then. It can’t be the only country whose male football fans subvert your expectations. Like I say: ‘Legalise Rape’? Good luck with that.

    • Brian says:

      Too drunk to consent isn’t rape.

      • The problem with “too drunk to consent” is how we decide who takes the blame:

        • The non-drunk partner, who should know better, but then a (relatively) innocent party may be blamed for what was at the time consensual sex; or
        • The drunk partner, who got into that state, but then we run the risk of giving a pass to any rapist smart enough to choose a drunk victim; or
        • All casual sex participants, in the best of the Puritan and Islamic State methods, at which point we dis-incentivize all casual sex and avoid all acquaintance rape;
        • I think people are leaning toward a legally-enforced version of the latter. At that point, the only male participants in casual sex will be those heading toward prison anyway. But then that can lead to dysgenics:

          It’s a long-held belief among animal breeders that pure-bred progeny are best produced by females who have never mated before.

          …The implications of the study are that any mates a female has had may leave some legacy—in the form of physical or other traits that are carried in the semen (but not the DNA-containing sperm)—that could show up in her future offspring with another mate.

          In other words, casual sex may pass on degenerate DNA to raised by good cuck husbands.

    • Bobby Barrett says:

      Yet this same team would gladly all go out with one or two compliant women and take turns fucking them. That’s OK.

  17. AgentofReactivity says:

    You’re missing the bigger picture, Brett, sexuality, especially as it is today, is a system of control designed to keep people passive and controllable , this is why the music industry and others promote stripping and twerking in their videos. Modern sexuality is a ruse designed to see value and desirability as independent from conflict and warfare, the more passive and controllable, the more attractive in the eyes of these people. Let’s go to strip clubs and fuck, you know because It allows us to pacify the warzone of life. This lack of respect for the value of conflict and Reactivity is how these modern sexual people are ruining this world.

  18. Itotalyhavealongdick says:

    I think your concept is quite novel, but what about the children being raped? Will it be seen the same way or heavily penalized?

  19. […] the line has blurred with casual sex. As I wrote in two controversial articles, rape is no longer the intrusion of a penis where it should not go. It is the intrusion of […]

  20. […] time ago, I wrote two articles on legalizing rape. My point was that consensual casual sex treats sex as a commodity and […]

  21. […] rape disturbing? Maybe its time that we legalize it. Legalize rape @Swede Reply With Quote […]

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>