Across the country, the approach ranges from abstinence until marriage is the only acceptable choice, contraceptives don’t work and premarital sex is physically and emotionally harmful, to abstinence is usually best, but if you must have sex, here are some ways to protect yourself from pregnancy and disease. The latter has been called “disaster prevention” education by sex educators who wish they could teach more; a dramatic example of the former comes in a video called “No Second Chances,” which has been used in abstinence-only courses. In it, a student asks a school nurse, “What if I want to have sex before I get married?” To which the nurse replies, “Well, I guess you’ll just have to be prepared to die.”   [...] Teaching Good Sex

Children and adolescents think that porn sex, with gagging, anal sex, coming in the face is the norm.

There is a lack of sex education that teaches kids to critically consume porn and understand that real sex is not exactly like in genitally focused hard core porn.

These very important issues will be described in detail in the following press reports and scientific papers.

Human-Stupidity Side notes: 

The legal morass of idiotic adolescent sex laws and CP laws

Human-Stupidity can not resist to mention taboo issues forgotten in the newspaper reports:  there are serious legal pitfalls to adolescent and childhood sexuality, due to child porn witch hunt and teenage sexuality taboos. For children to avoid these, they would have to be actively taught that groping a girl’s ass is sexual assault, consensual doctor play is a felony, consensual adolescent sex is a heinous crime (depending on complex age of consent laws with even more comples age of consent exceptions.)

• Consult a lawyer before playing doctor. Perverse sex laws traumatize children. Every child needs a personal attorney at all times to avoid arrest for sex crimes at age 6.  
  • 6 year old boy plays ‘doctor’ with classmate, charged with felony first degree sexual assault 
  • Was NJ Schoolyard Stunt ‘Horseplay’ or Criminal Sexual Conduct?
• Teenage sexuality: The immense complexity of local laws, state lines and international travel

Furthermore Human-Stupidity has the tenacity to dare mention that children must never see anything sexual or erotic related to their own age but are obliged to watch only big tit and big dicks in over 18 year old porn.  Worse, children or adolescents photographing themselves is a heinous crime that somehow victimizes themselves according to the voodoo theory of child porn.

• Sexting: Courts victimize Teens with child porn charges for exchanging their own nude photos

Any child or adolescent that would creatively dare to re-enact some porn scenes in the privacy of their home, with their friend and some home camera, will find out that this is one of the most heinous crimes in existence. Even if the behavior is harmless fully dressed dancing (see Knox vs. USA) or stripping, even if it is filming adolescent sex that is perfectly legal according to age of consent laws, it is heinous crime.  Filming harmless acts people do all the time is a worse crime then beating up people and comparable to clubbing someone to death.

I wonder why nobody ever mentions that children see child porn all the time. Children just need to look into the bath room mirror while they shower, or look at their partner in doctor play. How to explain child pornography laws to children seems an impossible task. Even more impossible because to a rational person from another planet these laws make no sense whatsoever.

I really wish that the sex educators could explain such aspects of adult idiocy to critically thinking children.

But I digress, I am sorry. Let us return to the issue of this post: Children and adolescents use porn to learn about sexuality, because sex education in school sucks.

Detailed press reports about sex education and children’s porn use

The X-rated alternative to inadequate sex education

New research suggests pupils look to pornography for answers

It involves anal sex as a matter of course. It can include images of women being choked or gagged. It is not uncommon for it to feature an ambiguous version of consent, in which "no" can mean "that sounds like fun".

And yet pornography is increasingly serving as a substitute for adequate sex education, new research has found.

Researchers Maree Crabbe and David Corlett conducted 140 interviews internationally, with pupils, teachers and professionals from the porn industry, and presented their findings in London last week. On average, they said, most pupils will watch porn for the first time at the age of 11. [...]

The researchers argue that the failure of sex education to address the positive aspects of sex drives pupils to seek further explanation in porn.

"Discussion of sex and intimacy is too often avoided in schools," the Australian researchers said, presenting their findings at a conference at London University’s Institute of Education this week. "Porn has become a cultural mediator in how young people are understanding and experiencing sex. Porn is our most prominent sex educator."

And the sex education community admits there is truth in these findings. Mary Clegg (pictured, right), chair of the British Association of Sexual Educators, confirms this. "A lot of our sex education is based on a don’t-do model," she said. "But young people are hungry for more explicit information. They’re curious and they’re hormone-driven." [...]

Pupils similarly assume that practices such as anal sex and ejaculation in women’s faces are a normal part of any sexual encounter. "The first time I had sex, I decided to go anal," one boy said. "She didn’t like that."

The researchers reported that 88 per cent of scenes in porn films show physical aggression, such as choking, gagging or spanking. This aggression is overwhelmingly directed at female performers. Nonetheless, the women always appear to enjoy the experience.

"Some guys have this perception that, if they just do it anyway, it’ll be amazing," one teenage girl said. "They just try and slip it in the other hole. It’s not really about asking any more – it’s all about doing and hoping for the best."

"You want to grab her hair and pull it back," a male interviewee added. "I mean, it’s a turn-on."

Acknowledging the difficulty of preventing access to porn, the researchers suggested that sex education lessons should therefore equip teenagers with the skills necessary to evaluate what they see.

"To be unable to critique imagery is equivalent to being illiterate in the modern world," they said. "We need to help young people to resist peer-group pressure to consume porn or to respond to partners’ requests for sex they’ve seen in porn."

Pornography is replacing sex education

A rising number of children are learning about sex from watching pornography because sex education lessons are inadequate, researchers have found.

The average age at which children first watch pornography is just 11, interviews with 140 pupils, teachers and people working in the porn industry also revealed.

Australian researchers Maree Crabbe and David Corlett said children were turning to adult films because schools were not handling the positive aspects of sex.  [...]

Mary Clegg, chair of the British Association of Sexual Educators, agreed there was a shortfall in sex education at schools.

"A lot of our sex education is based on a don’t-do model," she said.

"But young people are hungry for more explicit information. They’re curious and they’re hormone-driven."  [...]

Pupils also appeared to believe that sexual practices shown in porn were normal features of sexual relationships.

The researchers said pupils should be taught how to evaluate porn in sex education lessons.

"To be unable to critique imagery is equivalent to being illiterate in the modern world," they added.

"We need to help young people to resist peer-group pressure to consume porn of to respond to partners’ requests for sex they’ve seen in porn."

Earlier this week, a survey found more young people were having sex under the age of consent. Among 16 to 24-year-old women, more than a quarter had lost their virginity under the age of 16.

Diane Abbott, Labour’s Shadow Health Minister, said: “The rising numbers of girls having under-age sex is alarming. It is not a cost-free phenomenon. [...]

"Government needs to respond to spiralling under-age sex, not with pointless schemes to teach abstinence, but with better PSHE teaching in schools for both girls and boys.”

Meanwhile in the old repressive USA, NYT Magazine reports

In its breadth, depth and frank embrace of sexuality as, what Vernacchio calls, a “force for good” — even for teenagers — this sex-ed class may well be the only one of its kind in the United States. “There is abstinence-only sex education, and there’s abstinence-based sex ed,” said Leslie Kantor, vice president of education for Planned Parenthood Federation of America. “There’s almost nothing else left in public schools.”

Across the country, the approach ranges from abstinence until marriage is the only acceptable choice, contraceptives don’t work and premarital sex is physically and emotionally harmful, to abstinence is usually best, but if you must have sex, here are some ways to protect yourself from pregnancy and disease. The latter has been called “disaster prevention” education by sex educators who wish they could teach more; a dramatic example of the former comes in a video called “No Second Chances,” which has been used in abstinence-only courses. In it, a student asks a school nurse, “What if I want to have sex before I get married?” To which the nurse replies, “Well, I guess you’ll just have to be prepared to die.”   [...]

Two boys who told me they’d been masturbating to Internet porn since middle school said they found themselves disoriented at the real-life encounters they had with girls, but Vernacchio helped them grasp the disjuncture. Pornography “gives boys the impression that the girl is there to do any position you want, or to please you, or to, you know, role-play to your liking,” one of them said. “But yesterday, when Mr. V. said there is no romanticism or intimacy in porn, porn is strictly sexual — I’d never thought about that.” [...]

Pleasure in sex ed was a major topic last November at one of the largest sex-education conferences in the country, sponsored by the education arm of Planned Parenthood of Greater Northern New Jersey. “Porn is the model for today’s middle-school and high-school students,” Paul Joannides said in the keynote speech. “And none of us is offering an alternative that’s even remotely appealing.”  [...]

One of sex educators’ big problems, Joannides told the New Jersey audience, is that they define their role as the “messengers of all the things that can go wrong with sex.” The attention paid to S.T.I.’s, pregnancy, rape and discrimination based on sexual orientation, while understandable, comes at a cost, he says. “We’re worrying about which bathrooms transgender students should use while teens are worrying whether they should shave all the way or leave a landing strip,” he said. “They’re worrying if someone special will find them sexually attractive, whether they will be able to do it as well as porn, whether others have the same kind of sexual feelings they do.”  [...]

For instance, in addition to pulling condoms over bananas — which has become a de rigueur contraception lesson among “liberal” educators — young people need to hear specifics about making the method work for them. “We don’t tell them: ‘Look, there are different shapes of condoms. Get sampler packs, experiment.’ That would be entering pleasure into the conversation, and we don’t want that.” [...]

at the conference, an educator from Pennsylvania told me that one school asked her to teach a sex-ed class but forbade her to use the words “sex, ” “sexy” or “tampon.” (She declined.) A chipper young Unitarian sex educator from Brooklyn, Kirsten deFur, who led a workshop titled “Don’t Forget the Good Stuff,” gave tips on how her colleagues could avoid uttering the words “pleasure” and “orgasm.” “Ask open-ended questions about what feels good,” deFur recommended. And, she added, the P-word might even be acceptable in the proper context: “If you have healthy sex, it’ll be more pleasurable,” an instructor might dare to say. [...]

“The campaign for abstinence in the schools and communities may seem trivial, an ideological nuisance,” Michelle Fine and Sara McClelland wrote in a 2006 study in The Harvard Educational Review, “but at its core it is . . . a betrayal of our next generation, which is desperately in need of knowledge, conversation and resources to negotiate the delicious and treacherous terrain of sexuality in the 21st century.”

It’s axiomatic, however, that parents who support richer sex education don’t make the same ruckus with school officials as those who oppose it. “We need to be there at the school boards and say: ‘Guess where kids are getting their messages about sex from? They’re getting it from porn,’ ” Joannides exhorted. “All we’re talking about is just being able to acknowledge that sex is a good thing in the right circumstances, that it’s a normal thing.”

Of course, sex isn’t all pleasure or all peril, it’s both (and sometimes both at once, though that lesson may have to wait for grad school). Vernacchio has a way of getting at its positive potential without ignoring the fact that, however good sex may feel, it’s sometimes best left off the menu.

Source: Teaching Good Sex | NYT Magazine

• Kids turning to porn for sex education: study

In a recent New York Times Magazine story on sex education, the vice-president of education for the Planned Parenthood Federation of America said, “There is abstinence-only sex education, and there’s abstinence-based sex ed. There’s almost nothing else left in public schools.”    Kids turning to porn for sex education: study

The numbers derive from counting women that actively sought help at government counseling centers. We expect that there would not be many false complaints, but a large percentage of unreported cases.

In the year 2008, 3443 women sought help at counseling centers, because they were under the threat of forced marriage or actually forced to marry.

The casualty figures are much higher than previous estimates: The NGO Terre des Femmes was previously assumed, turn that in Germany every year more than a thousand women and girls from immigrant families go to counseling because of forced marriages.

For the new comprehensive study 1445 counseling centers were contacted. 830 of them reported back. The results also shed light on origin, age and history of the victims. Thus, every third person concerned in connection with the forced marriage is threatened with death. The vast majority of victims of forced marriages are from Muslim parents’ homes – 83.4 percent. According to the "Süddeutsche Zeitung" nearly two-thirds of the recorded cases are from families characterized as very religious.

Many have experienced extreme brutality

Almost all concerned come from immigrant families, but a third of girls and women who were forced into a marriage were born in Germany [probably to immigrant families (human-stupidity]) according to the survey. 23 percent were born in Turkey.  Turkey was the most frequent country of origin, followed by Serbia, Kosovo, Montenegro and Iraq.
Thousands of migrants are forced into marriage every year (Google translation)

• We recognize that this is a very serious issue of civil liberty that warrants attention.
  • Young women and girls being forced by their own family and their entire support network is an extreme threat. Please read the quotations and original articles below and on the picture links.
  • Human-Stupidity’s subsequent focus on unpopular and ignored side issues does not mean that we don’t recognize the seriousness of violently forced marriages.

• we suspect for every reported case, there probably are huge numbers of cases where marriages happen just by mild parental pressure and nobody ever complaints.
  • Of course, this is very problematic, we do not support such action.
  • But in our traditional position as Devil’s advocate who wants to instigate out-of-the-box thinking, we could question if such marriages could not  be happy. Maybe parents’ mate choices are more mature then 17 year old girls’ choices?
  • Of course, we absolutely do not support death threats and severe physical violence. And we are aware that knowledge of this violence might scare many girls into voluntary compliance.
  • No, Human-Stupidity does NOT support forced marriages

we do miss any mention  of male victims of "shotgun marriages". We hope the final report will at least mention such cases. Otherwise this is likely to be another case where only women victims will be considered and men’s rights being ignored

• Tausende Migrantinnen werden jährlich zur Ehe gezwungen Original Article
• An epidemic of forced marriages in Britain
• Penalties for Forced Marriage
• Germany’s government has proposed criminalizing forced marriage in an attempt to wipe out the traditional Muslim practice.
• Germany: Police say foiled forced-marriage kidnap bid
• Forced marriage | Newser
• Best Selling Books Tell the Horrors of Forced Marriage

Creepy Actor’s Creepy Marriage Should Be Illegal

Here’s the deal — Hutchison is 51 years old, and his new bride Courtney Alexis Stodden is a mere 16 years old!!! That’s right. She’s just a child and yet their "consensual" marriage to one another is as legal as they come apparently, thanks to none other than Courtney’s own mother!

Way to be a pervy creep and ruin a young girl’s life, Hutchison! Way to look out for your daughter, Moms! Is anyone sane in this really freakish situation?

How do people know that a happy marriage with a mature loving men will ruin a girl’s life? Nowadays, Romeo and Juliet would both be arrested, and the "Blue Lagoon" heroes (t least the boy) would be jailed after their return to "civilization".

• Dirty Old Men Marry Jailbait, Sexually Liberated Cougars Marry Young Men
• Michel Temer (70), new Vice-President of Brazil was 63 when he married Marcela Temer at age 20. Borderline Pedophilia or healthy human sexuality?

Her parents should have been arrested for letting a 51 year old PERVERT MOLEST their MINOR CHILD! Because mo matter how "old" she looks, she is just that…a child! For them to marry means that at some time he was putting the "moves" on her, or even dating her! That is ILLEGAL in most states here! GAG! I JUST THREW UP IN MY MOUTH AT THE THOUGHT! YouTube commentator

Evolutionary psychologist explains

Evolutionary psychologist Robert Kurzban explains the human propensity to meddle in other people’s private lives, to outlaw victimless sex "crimes"

1. FIRST comes an inner moral feeling (which usually serves to increase one’s own reproductive fitness).
2. THEN, after the fact,we find some logical reasoning to justify our moral feelings. We invent victims even if there are none

Kurzban explains how, in a small community, everyone gains reproductive advantage by restricting other people’s sexual liberty.

Finding victims where there are none

In the above YouTube video, we see a happy couple with conservative attitudes about virgin marriage. Cruel, anti-teenage sexuality age-of-consent laws frequently destroy such a love affair with cruelty

Thousands of men, and a few women men have their life destroyed in similar situations. A unholy union of religious conservatives and repressive feminists decide, against Álexis’ will, that she is a poor victim. That adolescent Alexis Stoddenis a child [17] that can not consent* to sex. But in some jurisdiction she magically has maturity to consent to sex with boys of similar age, while in other states 2 adolescents are raping each other when engaging in consensual sex. Systematic language manipulation changes the meamings of words like rape*, consent*, child*, pedophile* etc. Our language has been distorted so much, that: had Doug fondled her, before marriage, with full consent, he might have as well raped her forcibly, it would be the same. The same punishment, and the same press reports ("Actor sentenced for raping child"). Doug Hutchinson was wise enough to avoid this, but thousands of men languish in jail for consensual sex with adolescent "children". The Antifeminist has feminism-is-sexual-trade-union-theory to explain such institutionalized cruel interference in private bedroom affairs.

‘Green Mile’ Actor Doug Hutchison, 51, Marries Aspiring Singer, 16

"We’re aware that our vast age difference is extremely controversial," the couple said in a statement released by their spokesperson. "But we’re very much in love and want to get the message out there that true love can be ageless."
According to the Clark County, Nevada Marriage Bureau, both marriage license applicants must be at least 18 years of age. But minors (below the age of 18) are able to obtain a license with the consent of a parent or legal guardian — reasoning that at least one of Stodden’s parents approves of their daughter’s May-December marriage.
Hutchison’s young wife is a former beauty pageant queen and hopes to become the next big thing out of Nashville. Marrying a much older D-list actor is certainly one way to do it — although the couple insists that their union is based purely on genuine love.

We wish the happy Courtney Alexis Stodden and Doug Hutchinson good luck in their planned reality TV show

YouTube Video

YouTube Video

More condemnation

It is interesting how many people know what is best for Courtney Stodden and want to be Courtney’s substitute mother and decide for her. They can not imprison Courtney, her mother or Dough. But, be aware that thousands of men and boys (and a few women) are  in prison and on live-long sex offender lists for doing almost the same. [1]

And, of course, if Doug or Courtney herself would photograph themselves nude, they would face mandatory minimum 5 year jail sentences. Maybe you don’t see the wisdom of these child porn laws that (allegedly) are for Courtney’s protection.

 Creepy actor, 51, remains creepy by marrying 16 year old girl.

Well, he’s pretty creepy in real life as it turns out. The actor has just married a 16 year old girl. Disgusting. I don’t care how “in love” they are – or how he tries to justify what he’s done – it’s disgusting, and it should be illegal. [...]

Horrible. What’s even more gross – is that it actually IS ILLEGAL… but her parents gave permission for their daughter to marry, making it legal. Great parenting.

One should question why this is illegal. And why thousands of men languish in prison for having done almost the same. Dough Hutchinson would be in prison for "child rape", had he as much as fondled his bride before marriage.

A Creepy Actor + A Good Christian Girl = An Unfit Mother

We can think he’s a pig, and she is a little skanky, but I think the person to be questioned about how this even happened is Krista Stodden, who is Courtney’s mom. She signed a legal consent for her underage daughter to get married and says, “They are very much in love and we are so supportive of this.” I think this woman should be ashamed of herself.

What can these two possibly have to talk about and how can her mother not think it is disgusting. I don’t know these people, but my initial response to this story was one of horror. This poor child has been sold to an old man by her fame whore mother in an attempt to fast track her daughter’s career. It’s wrong and I blame the mother for allowing such a thing to happen.

I am curious about how they met, how long they have known each other, and how long they have been having sex. Hugh Hefner is famous for being with much younger women, but they are not children. This guy is gross, this girl is on her way to a porn career, and this mother should have her head checked. Stopping this train wreck will require more than keeping the faith.

What’s The Deal With Doug Hutchison’s Child Bride, Courtney Alexis Stodden?

I’ve been saying WTF since this story dropped. I’m not convinced the details of this union are as they’re being told. She’s a virgin, she’s a good Christian girl, she loves her new old man (who is four years older than her father, BTW), blah, blah, blah. I can’t fathom why a teenager would marry a man who is a little over a decade away from claiming social security or why her parents would agree to let their underage daughter get married in the first place. The only way I can make sense of this is to believe there must have been a payoff somewhere along the way. Conspiracy theory, I know, but do you have a better explanation? And don’t say it’s love because love at 16 is often unfulfilling and hardly sustaining. Someone should have grounded this kid, made her wash her face and banned her from wearing makeup, heels and push-up bras for at least a month.

I’m pretty sure the jokes on us and we’ll all soon learn that Courtney is actually a 32-year-old ex-stripper/divorcee from East Backwoods, Who Cares who went along with this charade for a large sum of money that she plans on using to get Air Jordans for her kids and breast implants for her herself. Until the real story comes out and the truth prevails (as it always seems to do) here’s a gallery of Courtney Alexis Stodden Hutchison. Eww. Prepare to be stupefied by the photos and appalled by her latest music video, “Car Candy.”

Related content:

• ‘Lost’ actor on teen bride: ’51 plus 16 equals love’
• ‘Lost’ actor dishes on marriage to 16-year-old
• ‘Green Mile,’ ‘Lost’ actor, 51, weds pop singer, 16
• Teenage Sexuality (48)  Teenage and Underage Sexuality, “the modern witch hunt” said a leading academic researcher.

A girl has a 100% valid state ID, with her photo and signature, and social security card. The ID proves she is 20 years old.  You engage in sex with her, Film it. Sell it. Due to strict liability statutory rape laws there is no way how you can escape prison after it turns out the girl is 15 and conned the state into falsely giving her an ID. People who distribute your perfectly documented porn, of course go to prison.  Even the press is unaware that 100 000 men who downloaded it, with perfect proof of being over 18 years of age, also can go to prison. 

Conclusion: to have sex, watch porn, you at least need to get a US$ 30 000 background check of your partner,  A detective has to get birth records, school records, interview parents and teachers. Even that is not 100% secure. Thus: never have sex, never engage in fondling or indecent behavior and never look at any nude or indecent pictures. Ever.

Society could not function if such strict liability without mens rea were the norm.

Teen porn star Bieyanka Moore’s disaster

In early 2010, Tyler Chanel Evans, a 19-year-old exotic dancer, took under her wing a pretty, homeless girl who said her name was Bieyanka. The girl had been standing for hours outside a convenience store with an overstuffed duffel bag. A few days later, the waif stole Evans’s expired learner’s permit and copied her social security number. 

All quotes from Teen porn star Bieyanka Moore’s disaster, unless stated otherwise.

Bieyanka, it seems, outwitted many people. She wasn’t 20 as she had told Evans, but a 15-year-old runaway from Palm Beach Shores. She persuaded the State of Nevada — perhaps with an adult’s help — to improperly issue her a driver’s license in Evans’s name. And using that license, she duped Miami pornographers into illegally hiring her to have sex onscreen.  Teen porn star Bieyanka Moore’s disaster

A 15 year old girl steals the identity of another girl that helped her when she was lost. Government gives her a legal driver’s license stating her age is 20.

Bieyanka Moore: Besides Doing Porn, 15-Year-Old Runaway Went on Nevada Crime Spree With Adult’s ID

MyspaceTyler Chanel Evans– the real version.​Lawyers for RK Netmedia, owner of porn site Reality Kings, still refuse to concede that a 15-year-old runaway who went missing last year is the same person who starred in one of its hardcore films. But the evidence is getting pretty conclusive. … More >>

Appraising Strict Liability (Oxford Monographs on Criminal Law and Justice)

Then she uses that government ID to do porn movies, and, obviously, to have sex. Whose fault is this?

Of course, the people who have sex and who make porn movies. Behooves them right: why do they do porn movies? They should be in jail anyway! And you should not have sex with someone not your wife and who looks under 35? [*1] [*2].  Before sex, Human-Stupidity.com recommends not only an ID check, but a background check ,by a detective, of school records, birth hospital records and more.

Strict liability and mens rea: go to prison even if you did all possible precautions to avoid a crime

The lawsuit against RK Netmedia, which Sherrita Smalley filed in Miami-Dade court this past December, is still developing. Attorney Grossman says Imber’s LLL Advertising will soon be added as a defendant. Florida criminal law decrees that "a minor’s misrepresentation of his or her age… may not be raised as a defense" in statutory rape prosecution.

This is called "strict liability crime" [1] [2] [3]  [4]

The liability is said to be strict because defendants will be convicted even though they were genuinely ignorant of one or more factors that made their acts or omissions criminal. The defendants may therefore not be culpable in any real way, i.e. there is not even criminal negligence, the least blameworthy level of mens rea. Strict liability (criminal)

Strict liability abuse in sex "crimes". No pharmacist goes to prison for filling prescription of doctor with false diploma

Much less will the pharmacist go to prison if the diploma was correctly signed by a State University registrar.

Strict liability makes sense in minor crimes, if it does not need to be proven a defendant knew that there was a non-parking sign. But would anyone be convicted of a parking violation if he could prove that government had put a "Parking" sign there? No! Such insanity only is valid in criminal sex persecutions, 95% of which are against men. If you read legal literature [1] [2] [3] [4] about lack of "mens rea" and "strict liability", it was never meant as means to imprison men that can prove they did everything to assure they only do legal acts. Even if the man can prove that there was no "No Parking" sign, that is enough to prove his innocence, an explicit sign that parking is allowed would not be needed.

For example, in Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Storkwain (1986) 2 ALL ER 635, a pharmacist supplied drugs to a patient who presented a forged doctor’s prescription, but was convicted even though the House of Lords accepted that the pharmacist was blameless. The justification is that the misuse of drugs is a grave social evil and pharmacists should be encouraged to take even unreasonable care to verify prescriptions before supplying drugs.

If a physician practices medicine for 10 years with a false license, will 3000 pharmacists go off to prison? Of course not. If he can prove he personally saw the doctor and confirmed the prescription, is he liable for a background check of the doctor’s life to see if his license has a legal problem? No. Only men in sex and porn crimes have such responsibility.

Now what is the purpose of this teenage sexuality witch hunt?  A Teenage runaway, forging documents to get a true government ID with wrong identity, name, and age, drives stolen vehicles and gets arrested for mayhem. She urgently needs government protection so men would not "use" her for sex? And even the most conscientious men who check ID (but fail to embark on a US$ 20 000 detective background check) would go to jail for a decade?

Is this not counter any understanding of human rights and due process of any sane American or European person? Is this not a pure witch hunt, totally unjust, unfair, against all legal principles?

So who gets protected by these laws? The Antifeminist proposes that these laws are uniquely designed as pure terror to scare off men from any type of sex other then with their aging feminist peers or spouses. See Robert Kurzban about evolution of moral judgments.

Despite the suit, Bieyanka Moore’s video and stills remain easily viewable on aggregating sites online — despite the pleas of Carissa’s family members, who seven months ago posted on several sites: "This is child pornography, and your site can and will face charges!"

Now it is hard, for a web site, to do background checks on any single person appearing there. Even to be updated about every single law suit and newspaper report. So what guilt do these web sites have?

Of course, Human-Stupidity.com has always stressed that it is very unclear, why distribution and even possession of pictures such as so called child porn should be a crime while videos of atrocious criminal acts are perfectly legal// Best Gore: (Warning: extreme gore and cruelty)

Anyone who downloaded legal porn with 2257 age check can go to prison

I think most people are unaware that a zealous district attorney now could subpoena the records of all sites that had this porn movie. Then he could imprison 100 000 men for downloading the offending move from a legitimate web site that did correct age check and 2257 documentation.  Prison serves them right. Men should learn not to look at porn. All men that download porn should be scared off for good. Even our main article did not see this danger for 100 000 men.

But the saga continues for her real-life alter ego, Tyler Chanel Evans. She was recently called to a Budget Suites in a seedy part of Vegas after Carissa vandalized a hotel room. Then, on April 25, Evans was cuffed on an open warrant for grand larceny and possession of a stolen vehicle. Carissa had given cops Evans’s ID when she had first been arrested for the crime. "Wrong subject booked," the judge wrote in the case file. "The individual was a minor who is being dealt with in the juvenile system. Case dismissed."

Thanks to the police report documenting her claim of a stolen ID, Evans says she was able to stay out of jail: "Now I keep the report in my back pocket."

Get a lawyer before courting

1. Men need legal counsel to to take precautions not just before sex, but even before courting, kissing and even before conversing with a woman.
2. We missed some essential precautions. 27 precautions are not enough, rather we arrive at a total of 34 precautions before talking, kissing, and sex.

Our original 27 precautions list has items such as

• proof of consent,
• proof that consent was never withdrawn for even 5 seconds,
• proof that the woman was not in any way mentally incapacitated in ways that would invalidate consent,
• proof of age for all women that appear to be under 35 years of age. Precautions against fake ID

A lawyer must be consulted before kissing, fondling, courting or even talking

“Excuse me. Miss. I would like to talk to you.

But before any conversation, may I please have your original ID for age and background checks?

Before getting any closer I will need a blood sample for sobriety and drug tests!”

Merely talking to a (potential) minor is dangerous.  Touching and kissing is a minefield

If she looks under 35, check ID to avoid minors

Complex laws “protect” adolescents below the “age of consent”. So the mandatory ID checks should be done not just for sex, but before touching and kissing. Thus you avoid “indecent acts with a minor” charges. ID checks are needed even before talking, because mere talking it could be considered “grooming” of a minor.  If a 17-year-old looks 30 years old, and if you met her with a fake ID in a over-21-years-bar you still get 15 years in jail. So for any girl looking under 35 years of age, ID needs to be checked for veracity before any further grooming and courting.

We already listed 27 essential precautions before sex in this ground-breaking article

• Get a lawyer before sex: 27 precautions before risking sex with a woman

28) Stalking and harassment charge avoidance

Stalking and harassment laws may put you in jail for phoning, texting, or sending flowers

In Britain, if a women feels harassed twice, like by one love letter and once you try to pick her up after work, she can sue you for harassment.

29) Sexual harassment avoidance

29) Don’t even think of flirting at work. Or at college. Sexual harassment laws abolished free speech at the work place or at US Universities. The Sexual Harassment Industry (SHI) forbids anything, from compliments, to elevator eyes to objectifying gaze. Any “power differential” makes you a potential rapist of your secretary. If there is no power differential, then you may be guilty of “peer harassment”.  Courts apply the “reasonable woman standard”, which says that any slightest discomfort to an (un)reasonable woman is sexual harassment. Men get convicted by the preponderance of evidence standard, not by the “beyond reasonable doubt” standard.

It is advisable to not cause any discomfort and displeasure in any woman, because she can always allege sexual harassment or rape. In these accusations, men are guilty until proven innocent. Proving innocence is especially difficult if she presses charges only after 36 years.  False rape accusations are a powerful weapon of angry women.

STD lawsuit avoidance

Be aware of future consequences of a sex act, cohabitation or marriage

To recapitulate the other precautions:

Summary of the other 27 precautions for a man before having sex

1. study of the law in your country and state of residence and at the actual location where the sexual activity takes place
2. If anyone appears under 40 years of age, check ID for age and authenticity with help of a detective or police
3. Incest avoidance through genealogy and genetic analysis
4. Test for alcohol, drugs, that nobody is legally incompetent or has mental impairment
5. Assure and document consent in writing and prove it never has been withdrawn, requiring seamless recordings or constant presence of several witnesses
6. safekeeping and organizing this documentation and recordings
7. Prevent child support, pregnancy support, spousal support, common law marriage claims
8. Prevent accusations of domestic violence, spousal abuse
9. Avoid prostitution charges
10. is married sex a safer alternative?

Read all in 27 precautions for a man before having sex.

Never have sex before you are 18: Underage avoidance.

Underage avoidance is very complex. Adolescents are in real trouble. If you are under 20, you should also study

Consult a lawyer before playing doctor. Perverse sex laws traumatize children

This should convince you to never have sex until you are at least 18 years of age. If you don’t get punished, then your partner might get punished. In California, if two 17 year olds have a sexual relationship, both are criminal rapists.

Teenage sexuality: The immense complexity of local laws, state lines and international travel

Why all these laws?  Has the world gone crazy?

Yes. Feminism, together with religious fanatics, have conspired to make laws to criminalize male behavior and sexuality. The AntiFeminist has his theory of the Sexual Trade Union. Robert Kurzban has some explanations why almost everyone gains from interfering in other people’s sexuality.

51 year old Dough Hutchinson married a 16 year old child (yes, by law she is a child) . Do you think, that, before marriage, Dough Hutchinson never touched Courtney Alexis Stodden indecently? Because that would be a heinous crime of child rape and grave victimization of poor Alexis. Or if he chatted with her on the internet, he would be in violation of grooming laws.

She is 16 y, he 51 y (35 years difference)

Age ain’t nothing but a number – just ask 51-year-old actor Doug Hutchison. Hutchison, whose film and TV credits include ‘The Green Mile,’ ‘Lost’ and ’24,’ said ‘I do’ to 16-year-old aspiring country star Courtney Alexis Stodden on May 20 in Las Vegas.
While the couple’s 35-year age difference has already raised many eyebrows, the newlyweds insist they are truly in love.
‘We’re aware that our vast age difference is extremely controversial,’ the couple told E! Online. ‘But we’re very much in love and want to get the message out there that true love can be ageless.’ NY Daily News

The age of consent in California is 18, for sex law purposes she is a child. If Dough Hutchinson ever had sex with Courtney before marriage, this is rape. All rapes are equal. Nowadays, marriage does not remedy such heinous felony.

Courtney Alexis Stodden’s mother claims:

"Courtney was a virgin when she married Doug," said Krista Stoddden. "She is a good Christian girl. NY Daily News

If he just engaged in oral sex or indecent touching, indecent acts with a minor are rape too, at least sexual assault. Even if he never touched her, then he might have sent her seductive emails and thus run afoul of grooming laws. If he crossed state lines with the intent of having as much as oral sex with her in a state where it 16 is the legal age of consent, he would be violating federal law in the USA.

Even if he consumated the sexual acts only in marriage, it still leaves open the significant question:

• why is Courtney unable to *consent to sex, but she can consent to marriage.
• And why, after marriage, can she consent to sex?

We need a criminal investigation. This husband needs to be arrested without bail, the minor child needs to be saved. Obviously she has been brainwashed. Furthermore, it is just disgusting how an old guy like that can be with an innocent child of 16. We need new laws to outlaw such behavior, to protect innocent 16 year old children from such a marriage. 

In California, any person, of any age, that has sex with a minor, is a child rapist and felon. Most ( teens have sex before 18 years. 65-70% have sex before they are 18.  That means, the average teen gets raped at least once and one person should go to prison.  So Millions of Californians need to be locked up in prison. The law is the law, and the law has to be obeyed.

Do you think our proposals are stupid, wrong, immoral?  Well, stand up and fight for all these laws to be revoked.

Near state lines, adolescents need to carry GPS to make sure they are in the right state. When one partner is between 16 and 18 years old, then the location is of primordial importance. If you are an adolescent and think you can go to a more liberal neighboring state to engage in erotic and sexual activity, think twice: US federal law makes it a felony to cross state lines with the intent to have sex with an under 18 year old adolescent.

But, even if you cross between 2 states with age of consent of 16, with intent to have sex with your 17 year old lover, you still run afoul of federal law!? Certainly, if you travel to Europe to have legal sex with a 15 or 16 year old, as a US resident you are committing a felony by US law. If a non-resident European in the US receives his Green card (residency), his hitherto legal relationship in Europe suddenly becomes a felony in the US. Sex law attorneys have a golden future!

Case study: Vermont

Vermont: Age of Consent: 16 Age gap Provision: Yes*

Lewd or Lascivious Conduct with a Child:
No person shall willfully or lewdly commit and lewd or lascivious act upon or with the body, or any part or member thereof, of a child under the age of 16 years, with the intent of arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust, passion, or sexual desires, of such person. This section shall not apply if the actor is less than 19 years of age, the child is at least 15 years of age, and the contact is consensual.
Adolescent Sexual Behavior and the Law

Legal today, but felony after next birthday

Analyzing Vermont law, one can see

• If she is 14, he is 18. They have to wait. Not even a lewd act with the body. No touching!
• On her 15th birthday, they can have sex.
• Careful! on his 19th birthday, at midnight, what they legally did before, becomes a felony again.
• After she turns16, they can go back to having sex.

Easy, is it not? just put this into grade school curriculum. It is a good training for reading comprehension of legal codes.

While in Florida

If you are 23 and have a 16 year old girlfriend, beware of your 24th birthday. You will become a criminal!

Florida: Age of Consent: 18 Age Gap Provision: Yes*
Unlawful Sexual Activity with Certain Minors:
A person 24 years of age of older who engages in sexual activity with a person 16 or 17 years of age commits a felony in the second degree.
In Section 943.04354 it states that a person can be removed from the sex offender registry if they were not more than 4 years older than the victim at the time of the offense and the victim was at least 14 years of age or older.

Proof of this is in the outrageously unconstitutional Florida law that says an adult can have sex with a 16 year old but not if he has reached his 24th birthday.

This law shows there is ZERO intention of protecting a minor from being gang banged.

The football team can do your daughter but not their coach or me.

http://roissy.wordpress.com/2010/07/08/hank-moody-chump/

Genarlow Wilson in Georgia

The situation is tricky. Ganarlow Wilson got a 10 year mandatory minimum jail sentence because he received oral sex instead of engaging in intercourse.

Genarlow, a 17 year old high school senior, was arrested for engaging in oral sex with a consenting partner who was two years younger than he. Those two years would prove to be crucial in this case, since the victim was below the age of consent which is set at 16 in Georgia where the incident took place.[...]

Age Gap Provisions
Ironically, if Genarlow had engaged in sexual intercourse with the 15 year old at the New Year’s Eve party, he would have only been convicted of a misdemeanor and not have been made to serve any jail time or register as a sex offender due to Georgia’s inclusion of an Age Gap Provision in their Child Molestation law. Because he engaged in an oral sex (sodomy) act, his case was classified as Aggravated Child Molestation, which at the time did not have the Age Gap Provision.
Adolescent Sexual Behavior and the Law

Georgia has some extremely problematic provisions regarding underage sex.  Guaranteed to keep your legal counsel busy.

Crossing state lines from Georgia to Tennessee

Everything is different once one crosses into a different state. Easy to comprehend for teenagers if we prioritize sex law education in school. Failure to educate in sex laws has far more serious real life consequences then failure to know physics or history.

Georgia: Age of Consent: 16 Age Gap Provision: Yes* 4y

Tennessee: Age of Consent: 18 Age Gap Provision: Yes* 3y

• In Georgia, 16 year old with 35 year old is ok. In Tennessee this is aggravated statutory rape.
• But, no Georgia is not more liberal in general. Due to lower age gap provision, in Tennessee 18 y with 14 y is ok (4 year gap), which is a felony in Georgia.
• In Tennessee, 13 y with 15 y is ok. In Georgia, sex or molestation is not ok. Interestingly, in consequence to Ganarlow Wilson laws, sodomy is legal for them (?)

The complexity of the law taxes the analytic capacity to interpret and understand complex texts. Obviously Texas elementary and high school students need to know all the pertinent legislation of their state (plus the neighboring states in case they go on vacation or trips)

Tennessee: Age of Consent: 18 Age Gap Provision: Yes*

Mitigated Statutory Rape: Class E Felony
(a)Mitigated statutory rape is the unlawful sexual penetration of a victim by the defendant, or of the defendant by the victim when the victim is at least 15 years of age but less than 18 and the defendant is at least 4 but not more than 5 years older than the victim.
Statutory Rape: Class E Felony
Statutory rape is the unlawful sexual penetration of a victim by the defendant or the defendant by the victim when:
(1)The victim is at least 13 years of age but less than 18 years of age and the defendant is at least 4 years older than the victim; or
(2) This victim is at least 15 years of age but less than 18 years of age and the defendant is more than 5 years older than the victim.
Aggravated Statutory Rape: Class D Felony
Is the unlawful sexual penetration of a victim by the defendant, or the defendant by the victim when the victim is at least 13 years of age but less than 18 and the defendant is at least 10 years older than the victim.  Adolescent Sexual Behavior and the Law

And in Brazil

A teen was arrested at his 18th birthday, with his 17 year old girl friend of many years. In Brazil, sex with adolescents of 14-17 years can be prosecuted under certain circumstances, especially upon parents’ complaint. On the other hands, adolescents under 18 get away even with murder because a minor’s criminal liability is extremely limited. So the girl’s father, a judge, waited for the 18th birthday to incriminate the poor boy. Certainly the girl appreciated the "protection" against abuse.

Muslim countries like Turkey

In Muslim countries, even foreigners can be convicted to serious whipping for minor "transgressions". Sex is a special taboo.

The following case caused major diplomatic ripples between Germany and Turkey

• Teenage boy jailed and sentenced for consensually kissing teenage girl (Marco Weiss-Charlotte-Turkey)

In addition to months in Turkish jails, poor Marco was in danger to be re-victimized and put before German courts after his return.

           and Saudi Arabia

I was told by that unmarried Saudi women returning from liberal Kuwait are routinely examined by Gynecologists at the  Saudi Kuwaiti border.  Traces of sperm ==> whipping for unlawful fornication outside marriage.

The dangers of false accusations

are even worse for adolescents then for adults. Like in Marco’s case in Turkey, there always is the aggravating circumstance that potentially false accusations of abuse, sex, and rape (especially against males) are always believed. The accused is arrested, tried and convicted, under complete disregard of constitutional human rights of due legal process.

If a girl was caught red-handed by mom, false rape accusations come in handy to distract from her own consent. But consent is irrelevant in adolescent rape cases, hence these accusations are even more dangerous then among adults.

• Yes means No! Forcibly raping a 17 year old is the same rape as consensual love making.
• Consent, rape & minors. What is consent to sex?

But even if the boy did nothing at all, false accusations are an even more powerful weapon of destruction and revenge. In the case of adolescents, there is no need to even allege non-consent, false allegations of consensual indecent acts are enough!

You have a girl friend under the local age of consent, and you (unwisely) want to have sex with her. Don’t bother to ask for her consent to sex.  Just ravish her violently, no matter how much she resists. It makes no difference if she consents or not. Her “yes” means “no”, her consent is invalid. Either way, if she consents or not, you are raping her. And all rapes are the same.

This is not my fault. I am not making this up. This is our modern law and modern logic.

“No” means “No”, too.

Minors under 18 (or 16) years of age can not consent to sex.  If s/he says “Yes”, it means “No”. If she says “No”, it means “No”, too.

A underage girl’s consent it totally irrelevant

1. On the way home 3 young men drag 15 year old Maria into an abandoned lot, 2 men hold her down and one rapes her violently, against her protests and screams.
2. 15 year old Maria begs her boyfriend to make love to her and they have a great love-making session.

What is the difference between (1) and (2)?

Both (1) and (2) are exactly the same: non-consensual rape!. If she consented or fought back makes no difference!

I am really sorry, forgive me.

I am not insensitive to rape victims.

Maria, if you think that forcible rape and love making are not the same, you are mistaken! You are too young to understand the wisdom of the elders, that know that these are the same.

I am sorry,it is not my fault. I did not make this up. I swear.  On the contrary, I dare to challenge conventional wisdom and write against this insanity.

• “Rape is rape is rape” is a lie, Joe Biden! 20 different types of rape!
• Some “rapes” are less serious then others. Of course, Mr. Kenneth Clarke is right!

There are cases where a 15 or 17 year old girl begs a judge not to jail her boyfriend and common law husband, father, financial supporter and caretaker of her baby. But, the laws are there to protect her (?from what??), and thus she is left a penniless single mother with a jailed boyfriend in prison.

We fail to see how this serves the well being of the child, which is of extreme importance to the law.

All rapes are the same

We just learned, from Vice President Biden “Rape is rape is rape” : all types of rape are the same.  British Kenneth Clarke said  that “some “rapes” are less serious then others” but was forced to recant.  Clarke explicitly stated that a 17 year old boy making love with his 15 year old girl friend is not the same as dragging someone into the bushes. A media outcry corrected him and recanted. So it is the consensus, that both are the same.

Feminist manipulative language made sure that almost every sex act is a potential rape. And now it is clarified that all rapes are the same.

“I love you, please make love to me”	=	“NOOO, don’t touch me, leave me alone”
	= (is equal to)

Offensive to forcible rape victims

Human-Stupidity has, repeatedly, assailed the tendency in modern law, incited by feminism, to “rape” and manipulate language, to use inaccurate and deliberately inflammatory, emotive language to try to foster a hidden agenda.

Due to feminist zeal to vilify consensual lovers of adolescent women, we belittle the true suffering of victims of forcible rape victims.

Human-Stupidity thinks it it truly offensive to the underage victims of real forcible violent rape

• to totally equate their suffering to the the “suffering” of willing participants in sex,
• to equate their resistance and unequivocal non-consent to the voluntary though legally invalid consent, or
• equate their violent abuse  to the suddenly withdrawn consent in a “six second rape”.

Human-Stupidity thinks that this language manipulation is an offense to our intellect, our language, to victims of forcible rape. A devious way to criminalize adolescent’s consensual sexuality without the masses noticing the plot.

Consent, rape & minors. What is consent to sex?

Any six year old knows perfectly well if s/he is coerced while overpowered and threatened, or acts consensually out of free will.

Try to explain her/him that the stupid adults have defined all sexual activity even of late 17 year or 15 year old  adolescents as non-consensual. So it is the same “non-consensual rape” if a 17 year old takes the initiative to work hard to seduce an adult to have sex, or if the same adult rapes him/her at knifepoint.

The first example is “statutory rape”  and the second is “forcible rape”, the reader might retort. That differentiation has long been lost outside theoretical academic discussion.  Remember: all rapes are equal. Rape is rape is rape.

The press happily reports about trials and conviction of “rapists” that raped the victim 300 times. No, she did not lock up the “victim” in a dungeon for years, like Mr. Fritzl. The victim came always came back for more, but did not consent (by our weird definition of legal consent). Human-Stupidity even documented a case where the rapist, unbeknownst to him,  was duped by the victim into raping her.

Children of 6,8, or 15 years risk serious legal consequences, even jail, if they don’t know these confusing definitions and regulations. Therefore this ought to be be mandatory elementary school subject.

Lingering doubts about the logic and necessity of age of consent laws

It looks like a symptom of our overcriminalization that formerly normal behavior, behavior that a major percentage of the population engages in is now a heinous felony.

The most parsimonious explanation is the antifeminist hypothesis, that this is to due to the sexual Trade Union of older feminists to reduce sexual opportunities for older men and young attractive adolescent women. Robert Kurzban adds to this that less successful males and even alpha males also increase their mating opportunities by repressing other people’s sexual freedom.
(Tiger Woods, hypocrisy, moral condemnation of promiscuity) // Why everyone (else) is a hypocrite (Robert Kurzban) )

• What scientific evidence is there that an adolescent does not have maturity to decide about sex and to consent. (there is plenty of evidence to the contrary, not only the Rind Study)
• How come that in some states 17 year olds get profoundly damaged by consenting to sex, while in other countries 14 year olds will not get damaged by sex?
• How come that 15 year old adolescents actually can consent to sex with a 15 year old but not with a 22 year old? What is the scientific evidence that sex with a 22 year old is is damaging but sex with a 15 year old is not?
• How come 15 year old boys have the maturity to be responsible for 20 years of financial child support, though they don’t have an option to abort as a woman would? Especially, why do 15 year old boys have to pay child support to a 25 year old that supposedly raped them?
• How come that historically the marriage age was 16, 14, 12 years?
• Girl 13, charged as sex offender and victim at the same time
  Sex laws traumatize 14 year old school boy who was happy to have affair with 26 year old woman
• Don’t forget: Get a lawyer before sex: 27 precautions before risking sex with a woman
  Consult a lawyer before playing doctor. Perverse sex laws traumatize children.

• Transcript: Hummer Mom’ Christine Hubbs Convicted of Underage Sex, Says She’s Not a ‘Predator’ 
• ABC’s readers comments
• Sex Is Evil: Film at 11 | Sexual Intelligence
• See improper relationships and crimes against nature committed by other women

Double standard: men punished more harshly then women

• If a man did the same, would it be called "underage sex"? No, it would be called rape. So there certainly is a double standard.
• Would a man get away with 5 years? A man probably would get 15 to 25 years in jail.
• In a TV interview, would a man not be treated much worse?

Sex has more serious consequences for boys then for girls: The double standard should be inverted!

In this modern age boys need more protection then girls (due to slower maturation, existing laws and scientific progress)

• adolescent girls mature faster then boys, physically, intellectually and psychologically. Legal age for marriage was, and still is much lower for girls then for boys in most countries in the world (Marriagable Age | Wikipedia, Elisabethan marriage customs, Historical Age of Marriage). This has also to do with gender roles with the more mature man the provider and protector.
• pregnancy, the real sex-induced "damage" to girls can be avoided by birth control. Girls have total freedom to decide if they carry a pregnancy to term or use their reproductive freedom for an early term abortion.
• Things have changed since the EEA, where evolution has shaped our inborn moral feelings, and since biblical times, when our religious code was written down. Fairly recently, we devised birth control, abortion, DNA tests, government welfare and legal child support obligation for men.
• In biblical times and the EEA, a girl had no option to avoid pregnancy through birth control, no option to terminate pregnancy through (early term) abortion, no courts nor police state  pursuing the father for support (except shotgun weddings due to pressure by the girl’s kin), no government welfare, no child care and job opportunities for single mothers. And her marriage prospects would have gotten really dim after having an out of wedlock baby.
• Thus, girls and women can have risk-free sex with no long term consequences.
• Boys, on the other hand are totally powerless once a woman got pregnant. Boys/men  have absolutely no chance to avoid the serious trauma of
  • decades of enforced ruinous child support  and alimony duty
  • with no automatic visitation rights to even see the child or influencing how the money is spent.
  • No rights but payment duties enforced by police and prison, not much different from slavery.

Thanks to the AntiFeminist for calling our attention to some of the above issues.

Now that we clarified that adolescent boys are in more need of protection then girls, Human-Stupidity dares to question if any adolescent needs government protection against his/her own decisions.

Are draconian punishments needed to protect adolescents from their own actions and decisions?

Human-Stupidity.com is getting ostracized for daring to question conventional dogma:

• Anything remotely sexual, indecent touch of adolescents is a heinous crime and deserve decades in jail, vigilante beatings, death penalty?
• Anyone who just merely questions the laws and punishments, like we so here, risks to incur the same punishments. We have been warned of the possibility of vigilante action and legal persecution, in spite of the fact that nobody here engages in sex with teenagers  much less in sex with children, or peruses child pornography, But, like in the middle ages where the mere thought of contradicting the bible was a dangerous sacrilege, our new witch hunts have new thought crimes. 
• Furnishing alcohol to minors is a crime. But it does not carry decade-long jail sentences, nor does it occupy large parts of Interpol, even though it can lead to accidental death, deadly fights, miscarriages and fetuses deformed for life. We also don’t penalize Hollywood movies of adolescents smoking or drinking. Maybe punishments for sexual offenses should be comparable to these.

What damage would be done if government did not meddle in consensual decisions of adolescent teenagers.?

Do adolescents need to be protected by draconian punishments from their own decisions?

Probably the very last free study, the Rind Study answered that no major damage is expected.

Scientific answers and scientific inquiry on adolescent sexuality is totally impossible

Once the US Senate condemns scientific research by a 99:0 vote, the congress by a similarly unanimous vote, not on its merit, but on pure demagogic knee jerk reactions, science is finished. It is impossible to conduct unbiased research about adolescent and child sexuality and its potential damages, or lack thereof.

Totally independent of policy and legal implications, we totally condemn political repression of scientific research as contrary to everything modern US and Western constitutions and research traditions stand for.

On July 12th, this year, the United States House of Representatives voted 355-0 (with 13 members voting "present") to condemn our study entitled "A meta-analytic examination of assumed properties of child sexual abuse using college samples," published in Psychological Bulletin. The Senate quickly followed suit. To our knowledge, never before in the history of this country has a scientific publication been so treated. Rind Study controversy

Research about adolescent and childhood sexuality in the 21st Century is s impossible. Equally impossible unbiased research about planetary movements In the 17th Century during the medieval reign of the catholic church that the burned astronomer Giordano Bruno and and nearly burned Galileo Galilei. Galileo escaped death only because he backpedalled and denied the truth his research had found.

No scientific research is possible when the results are determined beforehand and it is known that certain findings will lead to serious consequences.

While it would be interesting to discuss the Rind Study on its scientific merits, this can not be done with seriousness as long as one side can not get grants, will be fired if possible, and risks vigilante vendetta.

• Of course, the same is true about research into race and iq: unbiased research is impossible when Jensen gets pelted with tomatoes, Rushton almost got dismissed in spite of having tenure and being the most prolific and most cited scientist of the psychology department of his University, and Nobel Prize winner James Watson gets fired from his own institute and his solt-out lecture cancelled for suggesting that Africa’s problems might be caused by lower intelligence of the black race
• similar issues apply to illicit drugs like marijuana

Adults seriously endangering and damaging children suffer little or no legal consequences

• If someone gives alcohol, cigarettes to children, they don’t get 20 years in jail.
• Even consistently overfeeding children and toddlers on junk foods that cause severe health damage and early death remains totally unpunished.
• Pregnant women drinking alcohol crippling their fetus for life with fetal alcohol syndrome go unpunished.
• Bullying in school is also not seriously

Ancient reasons for double standard in adolescent sexuality are no more valid

• Our religious traditions, and our "gut feelings" were made in the EEA, 100 000 years ago.
• Historically, there is a reason for the double standard. Girls can get pregnant, have to support the child, become un-marriageable. This has changed

Historical situation	Modern Situation
Girl could get pregnant	We have birth control. Even in case of pregnancy, girl has full capacity to decide for (early) abortion
Girl could not afford to support the baby	Women are supposed to be empowered and able to earn money children get day care single mothers get welfare Men get forced to pay child support with all the power of the law
Girls who lost virginity, or worse, got pregnant were unmarriageable	Society has changed. Single mothers are not heavily ostracized any more.
Boys who impregnated girls could shirk financial responsibility	Everywhere in the world, men are totally responsible for their offspring. Sometimes even if it is not their offspring. Medieval debtor’s prison has been re-instituted: many men are in jail for refusal or incapacity to pay child support. Boys have absolutely no reproductive rights, absolutely no control if a pregnancy will et carried to term or not. They are obliged to pay, totally dependent on the woman’s decision.

• We have birth control and abortion.  So the girl has full control if she wants to have the baby or not.  Men have no control. That is already a serious power imbalance among adults.

  • Minors are legally are not able to enter into legal contracts. It seems very strange that young boys can get ordered to pay child support for decades. There would be very strong legal and psychological argument that the minor has not the capacity to enter into 20 year contracts (especially with an adult!)
  • Maybe impregnating a minor should be the crime, not the sexual act.

If the woman got pregnant, the boy would have to have to pay child support for 20 years, maybe even without being able to see his children. Human-Stupidity thinks that

• being obliged, under serious threats of legal consequences, to pay child support for decades, is traumatic for an adolescent
• while we have strong doubts about prevailing wisdom that an adolescent can not consent to sex, we feel much stronger that an adolescent can not consent to a 20 year obligation to pay a large portion of his income. Or worse, to be obliged to generate income instead of studying.
• an adolescent girl who had unprotected sex with a man always has the option to get an abortion. They boy only has the option to pay.

Related articles

Grant County authorities have accused a 6-year-old boy of first-degree sexual assault of a child for allegedly playing “doctor” with a 5-year-old girl in September.

The case, which is plowing new legal ground in Wisconsin, calls into question when a child’s act can be considered criminal — particularly when it involves behavior some experts say is normal for children that age —

Normal behavior is criminalized (Overcriminalization)

Of course, normal behavior is criminalized at all ages. Playing doctor for kids, adolescent sexuality later, sexting and photographing legal sex acts (child pornography). Or attraction of grown men to adolescent women. All is illegal.

According to the petition for protection or services filed Nov. 12, the girl’s mother found her daughter in the boy’s yard “with her skirt and underpants around her ankles” and the boy sitting underneath her, penetrating her with his finger. The petition alleges the boy “did have sexual intercourse with a child under the age of 12.”

State law defines sexual intercourse, in part, as “intrusion, however slight, of any part of a person’s body.”

Toddlers need legal counsel and classes in stupid adult sex laws

The boy failed to read Human-Stupidity.com’s advice about playing doctor. 

• Consult a lawyer before playing doctor. Perverse sex laws traumatize children This boy certainly will be traumatized for life. The girl to a lesser extent, too.

Typical problems:

• Only one witness, the mother. If she has a grudge with the boy, his family, or if she is mentally instable suffering from phantasies, her accusation is accepted.
  • The daughter, after being exposed to mother’s hysteria, is not a reliable witness.
  • The boy’s confession to the mother is hearsay. He needs to be read his Miranda rights and be advised to plead the 5th (not to say anything because he could incriminate himself).
  • Furthermore the boy is not fit to stand trial
  • I know, this is ridiculous.
• language abuse: slightest penetration with the finger is called "sexual intercourse". Why does modern feminist inspired law have to pervert our language?
• Discrimination against males: why can’t the girl be guilty for statutory rape?
• No Romeo and Juliet clause for being of similar age

The girl told her mother they were playing “butt doctor” and told authorities the boy only touched her on the outside of her body, court documents state. A third child, a 5-year-old boy, also was with them, but he did not touch her inappropriately, the girl said.

All hinges on mother’s statement. Maybe she is hysterical?

Judge Leineweber refused to dismiss the petitions, saying the relevant part of the sexual assault allegation is the mother’s observations.  Case asks: Can a 6-year-old commit sexual assault?

Next problem:

• confounding consensual* acts with sexual assault. Did he hold down the girl against her will? Yes, I know, the girl is unable to consent. So is the boy.

The boy needed only to have penetrated the girl and known she was under a certain age, he wrote, adding, “Even the most immature 6-year-old could appreciate these two concepts.”

Why should a 6-year-old know that playing doctor is a felony? Did we teach him?

Why should a boy understand that playing doctor is a heinous crime?  That is about as asinine as criminalizing taking one’s own photos.

has he been taught that in school? Is teaching stupid adult laws a mandatory kindergarten subject? Is Human-Stupidity’s playing doctor advice. Our blog must be mandatory reading in kindergarten.

Why should 6-year-old boys know that consensual doctor play constitutes sexual assault?

He  probably does not know what sex is. But he knows what consent is and the girl certainly consented.

The most immature 6-year-old understands the concept of consent. Adults and judges don’t understand the difference between consensual*  activities and sexual assault/rape.

Playing doctor is normal for 6-year-olds

The boy’s lawyer, Stephen Eisenberg of Madison, called the allegations “crazy” and said he has never heard of a 6-year-old being accused of first-degree sexual assault. The boy is now 7.

Right. A sensible comment.

Sexual exploration normal in young

Dr. Lucy Berliner, director of Harborview Center for Sexual Assault and Traumatic Stress in Seattle, Wash., said it is “completely outside” accepted medical practice to characterize a 6-year-old’s actions as sexual assault.

Another sensible comment

Read the entire case: Case asks: Can a 6-year-old commit sexual assault?