NationStates Jolt Archive

http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/search?p=rape+11&c=

I just saw this at CNN..

OccQ: If this is turns out to be true and.. kidnapping + rape did take place.
What should the penalty be?

OccQ: If this is turns out to be true and.. kidnapping + rape did take place.
What should the penalty be?

they should be put in some kind of institute for children with psychiatric problems and be reeducated. Obviously they have other problems than adult rapists, and should be treated different.

Something doesn't seem to add up... I don't know what, but it looks like the ages. I can see them physically hurting her but the sexual thing? That's leaving me confused given what we know about human development.

http://www.thestar.com/article/278022

The part I find disturbing is that she spoke about it at a slumber party... it seems kind of a traumatising thing to talk about.

8-9 year olds raping? Bull. They can't even ejaculate yet. Something doesn't seem to add up here.

How did the boys even manage this? I doubt they went through puberty yet, and well.... kinda hard to get it up....you know.....

http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/search?p=rape+11&c=

I just saw this at CNN..

OccQ: If this is turns out to be true and.. kidnapping + rape did take place.
What should the penalty be?

Interesting how there is a deafening silence from the religious right - I guess rape is ok as long as it is heterosexual.

It's a sad story, if it's true. What would make young children do that to another child? :(

Interesting how there is a deafening silence from the religious right - I guess rape is ok as long as it is heterosexual.

Huh? :confused:

I heard on the news this morning that the father of one of the boys said sex did happen, but that it was consensual. The reason they are being charged with rape is because neither party is old enough to consent. (Which brings up another point. If that is the case, shouldnt they both be tried for rape?)
these kids need some help, or disposed of (seriously)... if they are in prison for the next five years, how can they possibly help society as adults?

How did the boys even manage this? I doubt they went through puberty yet, and well.... kinda hard to get it up....you know.....

From my understanding vaginal rape is when the penis passes the labia majora so they wouldn't really have to get it up

.........

Then again I have very little idea of what i'm talking about

8-9 year olds raping? Bull. They can't even ejaculate yet. Something doesn't seem to add up here.
A questionable assumption, at most. Perhaps they just hit puberty early.

clearly we do not have enough information to judge rather the boys actually did what they are accuse of base on a newspaper article. So for me to make that assumption will be rather meaningless.

To answer the OP's question however, that if they are found guilty for their act, then charge them for what their crime is worth. Rehab have never shown to work with rapist so why would this be any different? Clearly the intention to hurt and dominate was in the perpetrator's mind regardless of rather or not they can fully comprehend the sexual element of the act, which is usually the same drive that motivate adult rapist as well. It will not be far fetch to assume that they will attempt to do just the same thing when they come out of jail just like any other convicted adult rapist would.

I heard on the news this morning that the father of one of the boys said sex did happen, but that it was consensual. The reason they are being charged with rape is because neither party is old enough to consent. (Which brings up another point. If that is the case, shouldnt they both be tried for rape?)
these kids need some help, or disposed of (seriously)... if they are in prison for the next five years, how can they possibly help society as adults?
That's assuming you can take the father's word for it, and the father would obviously be inclined to defend his son. Though yeah, if that's true, then indeed they should all be tried equally...

It's a sad story, if it's true. What would make young children do that to another child? :(
usually when children sexually abuse other children it's because they are acting out the abuse they received, and yes 8 and 9 year olds can rape people, even babies get erections.

That guy in the video said the girl was bragging about it, I wonder if that is true...

Interesting how there is a deafening silence from the religious right - I guess rape is ok as long as it is heterosexual.

That is a despicable thing to say you pervert.

That is a despicable thing to say you pervert.

If you had any reading comprehension skills, you'd realise the meaning of what BottomBoys has written, and it is NOT condoning rape. He is saying how the silence of one side makes it seem ok.

That is a despicable thing to say you pervert.

Well that was deserved :rolleyes:

It's a sad story, if it's true. What would make young children do that to another child? :(
Well, even rapists differ from person to person so I'm assuming that not everyone who rapes would rape for the same reason. Of course, it's not legitimately justified, but nor are a lot of things children do; the legal issue is that children supposedly don't know better. I'm not sure if I agree with that being a justification for lighter punishment, but giving kids an exception in punishment seems to be how our society works. Little kids get away with bullying, there's terrible standards of justice in elementary schools (back in grade 6 a few people in the classroom took stuff out of the teacher's purse and put it on my desk to make it look like I did that, the rest of the class saw that and when the teacher came in not one of them said I didn't) and I'm assuming "innocence of children" refers only to the assumption that children don't "know better" as I can tell that the idea that little children are harmless is BS.

That is a despicable thing to say you pervert.
No, he's saying that the "religious right" sees heterosexual rape as ok based on how there doesn't seem to be much of a response to this from that demographic... I don't think it's reasonable to assume they see it as ok just because that demographic doesn't seem to have reacted much yet but is more so making a point about how they seem to be making a big deal about homosexuality when obviously things like these are more of an issue.

"How can an eight or nine year old boy think of doing something like this to a little girl? I mean how do they know what to do at that age? Boys at that age should be playing sports or playing video games," said the victim's mother.

QFT

Appropriate sentence: Eight months.

With NAMBLA.

:D

That's an unfortunate term you've added to your search history OD. :p

the kids need proper counseling (which they probably won't receive) and some serious thought needs to be taken into why this happened (which also won't happen)

OP question is looking for a lynch mob methinks

Rehab have never shown to work with rapist so why would this be any different?

proof?

SNIP

hmm you seem to hold a grudge against children for what they did when they really didn't know any better

how childish :p

How did the boys even manage this? I doubt they went through puberty yet, and well.... kinda hard to get it up....you know.....

I don't see why Viagra wouldn't work. Also, I remember having erections for no perceptible reason, before puberty.

OP question is looking for a lynch mob methinks :confused:


what -on earth- would give you such an impression?
I want to know what people from differnt parts of the world think.. This is the most international Forum I know..
If I just wanted to know what people in my country thinks.. I just need to talk about it at the bar.

No, he's saying that the "religious right" sees heterosexual rape as ok based on how there doesn't seem to be much of a response to this from that demographic... I don't think it's reasonable to assume they see it as ok just because that demographic doesn't seem to have reacted much yet but is more so making a point about how they seem to be making a big deal about homosexuality when obviously things like these are more of an issue.

Yes, that was the point I was trying to make. I find it confusing how there is mass hysteria by the religious right over same sex marriage, and yet, when events like the above happen; or the numerous attacks against females every day, there is a deafening silence from the religious right.

The religious right, through their silence is condoning violence against women - do they still subscribe to the view that women are 'less of a person', the 'source of mans down fall' and 'child birth is god punishing women for eve's sin'? because all the silence from the religious right seem to back that up.

She probably just wants attention, or her mother...

No way in hell this actually went down.

hmm you seem to hold a grudge against children for what they did when they really didn't know any better

how childish :p
It's not like I was saying they did know better but that I wasn't going to take the stance that I myself was necessarily saying they knew better. Don't put words in my mouth. My point is that "innocence of childhood" only makes sense referring to the innocence in the sense that they don't know better, since it's quite obvious that children aren't "harmless," at least not to other children, while the person I was responding to seemed to be acting as if it was the latter, or that the latter was even the case. (when it quite obviously isn't) Now I'm not comparing bullying to rape in the sense of the extent, it's just pointing out that it's not like kids would be too gentle to do this, though granted, maybe the person I was responding to wasn't implying that, I guess I might have jumped the gun...

Investigate the allegations, determine the facts of the case. If the allegations are true, charge the perpetrators and hand down harsh but commensurate sentences without regard to their age. If allegations are false, bury the case and arrange appropriate penalties for false accusation.

I don't proscribe to the idea of child courts or lesser sentences for juvenile crimes. It's a farcical idea that only serves to water down the law into consumer friendly doses.

The more you coddle juveniles when they do wrong, the less likely they'll get the idea that it is wrong.

I don't understand how those boys could have done that....

Appropriate sentence: Eight months.

With NAMBLA.

:D

With their reaction at that young of age they probably already served a sentence worse then that

I don't understand how those boys could have done that....

Male reproductive organ inserted into female reproductive organ. Hardly rocket science.

You should be asking why. Not how.

She probably just wants attention, or her mother...

No way in hell this actually went down.

Why not? its not like child on child sexual abuse is uncommon

http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/search?p=rape+11&c=

I just saw this at CNN..

OccQ: If this is turns out to be true and.. kidnapping + rape did take place.
What should the penalty be?

Either way this signifies that society has hit a new low.

Either society, parenting has gotten so bad and that myriad bad influences encouraged these children to act like teenagers and actually attempt to do something sexual or American society has gotten soo obsess with sex that just about anyone and everyone is a possible sex offender. Remember that one incident where a family was sued by a pre-school teacher for sexual assault when all the child did was rub his face in her bosom? And now there's this. Its all a bunch of unreasonable paranoia,

Male reproductive organ inserted into female reproductive organ. Hardly rocket science.


Exactly, it couldn't have been that hard.

Yes, that was the point I was trying to make. I find it confusing how there is mass hysteria by the religious right over same sex marriage, and yet, when events like the above happen; or the numerous attacks against females every day, there is a deafening silence from the religious right.

The religious right, through their silence is condoning violence against women - do they still subscribe to the view that women are 'less of a person', the 'source of mans down fall' and 'child birth is god punishing women for eve's sin'? because all the silence from the religious right seem to back that up.
And you get this conclusion from where now? Jesh, it's a rape case, why on Earth would a reporter go ask the religious right about it? Do they have a history of advocacy for or against it? No.

You can well say that since the APA hasn't released a news brief condemning this rape that they must support it. :rolleyes:

If you had any reading comprehension skills, you'd realise the meaning of what BottomBoys has written, and it is NOT condoning rape. He is saying how the silence of one side makes it seem ok.

*Sigh* I am aware of what he meant, but what he said is so ridiculous, so I desided to fight fire with fire so to speak.

Yes, that was the point I was trying to make. I find it confusing how there is mass hysteria by the religious right over same sex marriage, and yet, when events like the above happen; or the numerous attacks against females every day, there is a deafening silence from the religious right.

The religious right, through their silence is condoning violence against women - do they still subscribe to the view that women are 'less of a person', the 'source of mans down fall' and 'child birth is god punishing women for eve's sin'? because all the silence from the religious right seem to back that up.

Well you don't hear feminists and an aclu outcry over the soudi woman whipping and when muslims beat women. But im sure they dissaprove, they are just busy dealing with more important matters like forcing colleges to accept women and taking the 10 commandments statue down from a city hall/

Well you don't hear feminists and an aclu outcry over the soudi woman whipping and when muslims beat women. But im sure they dissaprove, they are just busy dealing with more important matters like forcing colleges to accept women and taking the 10 commandments statue down from a city hall/

...erm, I hear a lot of feminists, myself included, speak out against the treatment of women under Sharia law. I don't, admittedly, hear the American Civil Liberties Union, an organization devoted to upholding the American Bill of Rights, a document only valid within America, do so too very much. I can't imagine why.

She probably just wants attention, or her mother...

No way in hell this actually went down.

Ok, can you elabo-crazy?

Why not? its not like child on child sexual abuse is uncommon

Am I missing something here?

http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/search?p=rape+11&c=

I just saw this at CNN..

OccQ: If this is turns out to be true and.. kidnapping + rape did take place.
What should the penalty be?

Lethal injection.

It's a sad story, if it's true. What would make young children do that to another child? :(

Most children who sexually abuse other children were/are sexually abused by adults.

Male reproductive organ inserted into female reproductive organ. Hardly rocket science.

You should be asking why. Not how.


I meant why, they aren't even in puberty yet.....

She probably just wants attention, or her mother...

No way in hell this actually went down.

Always nice to blame the victim. In fact, this is NOT a new phenomenon and it is most certainly physically possible and plausible.

I meant why, they aren't even in puberty yet.....

Maybe they thought this was a form bullying. Who knows?

Always nice to blame the victim. In fact, this is NOT a new phenomenon and it is most certainly physically possible and plausible.

How? They don't have the urges, TOO DAMN YOUNG! DAMNIT PEOPLE[US] ONLY TAKE LEGAL ACTION WHEN YOUR ACCUSATIONS ARE PLAUSIBLE! :headbang:

Damn, no wonder Europe hates us. :(:headbang:

Bah, you people have far too much faith in humanity. I wouldn't go so far to say that this is common, but it does happen. Stories like this have been posted on NSG before IIRC, anyway.

Penalty... ten years prison?

How? They don't have the urges, TOO DAMN YOUNG! DAMNIT PEOPLE[US] ONLY TAKE LEGAL ACTION WHEN YOUR ACCUSATIONS ARE PLAUSIBLE! :headbang:

Damn, no wonder Europe hates us. :(:headbang:

...yeah, 'cause rape is totally about fulfilling one's sexual urges, and not at all about power.

Oh, no, wait. That's totally incorrect, as study after study have shown to anyone who bothers to read such things before arguing. :rolleyes:

Maybe they thought this was a form bullying. Who knows?

ussually I would suspect the victim of getting attention, now I'm not sure.....

ussually I would suspect the victim of getting attention, now I'm not sure.....

Forgive me if I misunderstood, but are you actually saying seriously that your default position in cases of alleged rape is to assume the victim is lying?

Forgive me if I misunderstood, but are you actually saying seriously that your default position in cases of alleged rape is to assume the victim is lying?

no thats not I meant, usually I never got to think that since the prosecutors always had evidence. But this case is much more different, it has kids.....

Ah, okay. You just had me a little freaked out there for a minute. :)
:(


I even freaked myself out for a moment, I just hope the prosecutors will have enough evidence.

no thats not I meant, usually I never got to think that since the prosecutors always had evidence. But this case is much more different, it has kids.....

Ah, okay. You just had me a little freaked out there for a minute. :)

And, yeah, kids raping kids is one of those things that messes with your perceptions. Sadly, it's not even as uncommon as I'm sure we'd all like to believe. :(

Interesting how there is a deafening silence from the religious right - I guess rape is ok as long as it is heterosexual.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

GAH, how is this happening??? Nine year olds RAPING 11 year olds?!?!? WTF!?!

...erm, I hear a lot of feminists, myself included, speak out against the treatment of women under Sharia law. I don't, admittedly, hear the American Civil Liberties Union, an organization devoted to upholding the American Bill of Rights, a document only valid within America, do so too very much. I can't imagine why.

There is a large group of Muslim feminists who are fighting tooth and nail to fix the rotten system; too bad the media would much rather focus on the latest exposé by Mr XYZ from an unnamed political party who had slap 'n tickle with an intern.

Imagine if the media focused on people doing something positive for society instead of swooping in on the latest sensationalist story - we might actually get some where as a society.

As for the idiot who raised the APA - that isn't the issue; they aren't slathering a whole community of people and claiming that 'society's down fall are due to these guys" then points to a group of homo's. It is the religious right who take the moral high ground, claim that everything wrong in society comes back to the fact that society tolerates homosexuality, and yet, when a blatant example of a heterosexual rape involving three minors - where is the religious right there to condemn it?

If you replaced the girl with a boy, I'll bet my bottom dollar that they would be all over the story like a rash; Pat Robertson out in full force claiming that 'this monstrous action was as a result of the liberal homosexual agenda to defile marriage, confuse children and drive them to criminal behaviour'.

the only thing unnatural is that there are laws making a big deal about this. and that there are cultural (and 'religeous') values and ways of life that make it traumatic, thus giving rise to such laws.

=^^=
.../\...

the only thing unnatural is that there are laws making a big deal about this. and that there are cultural (and 'religeous') values and ways of life that make it traumatic, thus giving rise to such laws.

I must be reading this wrong, because it almost seems like you're suggesting that children should be allowed rape each other. But I must be wrong.

not completely wrong, not completely right. the real issue is one of context. the specificly negative context of condeming women for possessing sexual apatites for which men are usually not. the excuse of 'belief' for the unnatural prevalance of such views and so on.

Which is hardly relevant to a thread about two children allegedly raping another.

I must be reading this wrong, because it almost seems like you're suggesting that children should be allowed rape each other. But I must be wrong.

not completely wrong, not completely right. the real issue is one of context. the specificly negative context of condeming women for possessing sexual apatites for which men are usually not. the excuse of 'belief' for the unnatural prevalance of such views and so on.

=^^=
.../\...

As for the idiot who raised the APA - that isn't the issue; they aren't slathering a whole community of people and claiming that 'society's down fall are due to these guys" then points to a group of homo's. It is the religious right who take the moral high ground, claim that everything wrong in society comes back to the fact that society tolerates homosexuality, and yet, when a blatant example of a heterosexual rape involving three minors - where is the religious right there to condemn it?

If you replaced the girl with a boy, I'll bet my bottom dollar that they would be all over the story like a rash; Pat Robertson out in full force claiming that 'this monstrous action was as a result of the liberal homosexual agenda to defile marriage, confuse children and drive them to criminal behaviour'.
1. Calling someone an idiot on this forum is a very good way to get pointed and laughed at if that is the extent of your argument.

2. There was a point to my post, you missed it completely. Hardly surprising with what you have previously said.

This is the logical conclusion of the Zero Tolerance mentality and the Religious/Marxist-Feminist dogma.

Simple normal sexual exploration and experimentation by kids is deemed abnormal and criminalized.

And of course the 8 and 9 year old "men" are responsible because after all girls can only be victims.

Now that the Government owns sex, the mob will determine what you can do with your body.

Which is hardly relevant to a thread about two children allegedly raping another.

to the contrary, it is completely relivant to any context of the issue.

=^^=
.../\...

This is bullshit and didn't happen. It's the Scottsboro Trials part deux sans racism.

to the contrary, it is completely relivant to any context of the issue.

Given that the children are probably pre-pubescent then noting that women are criticised for having sexual desires is not relevant. Further, given that, as someone has already pointed out, rape have nothing to do with sexual urges, it's even less relevant.
This is bullshit and didn't happen.

Do you have some evidence of this that the media doesn't?

Do you have some evidence of this that the media doesn't?

No

No

So how do you know it didn't happen? Psychic powers? Tarot card reading? A voice in your head told you?

*Sigh* I am aware of what he meant, but what he said is so ridiculous, so I desided to fight fire with fire so to speak.

You claim BB made a ridiculous comment, then why not just come out and deride the comment itself instead of calling names.

OccQ: If this is turns out to be true and.. kidnapping + rape did take place.


Is that even possible for a 8/9 year old?

What should the penalty be?

I dunno...counseling...correctional facilities etc ?

This is the logical conclusion of the Zero Tolerance mentality and the Religious/Marxist-Feminist dogma.
What? Marxism has NOTHING to do with underage sex/rape

Simple normal sexual exploration and experimentation by kids is deemed abnormal and criminalized.
Is that what happened in this case?

And of course the 8 and 9 year old "men" are responsible because after all girls can only be victims.
Are you suggesting that she raped them?

Now that the Government owns sex,
Don't be stupid.

http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/search?p=rape+11&c=

I just saw this at CNN..

OccQ: If this is turns out to be true and.. kidnapping + rape did take place.
What should the penalty be?

i dont care if you receicved the congressional medal of honour, the noble prize, saved a kitty cat from a tree, and save the presidents life and your a father you should be castrated and then either electrocuted or burned alive

You claim BB made a ridiculous comment, then why not just come out and deride the comment itself instead of calling names.

Because I was feeling lazy and I wanted to mock him.

i dont care if you receicved the congressional medal of honour, the noble prize, saved a kitty cat from a tree, and save the presidents life and your a father you should be castrated and then either electrocuted or burned alive

you do realize we are talking about children right?

not that your argument seems to make any sense either way...

Is that even possible for a 8/9 year old?
I already posted this, but nobody seemed to pay attention since they all keep asking but yes, it's possible.

Boys begin having erections when they are newborn infants and continue to have them several times a day throughout childhood.
http://www.drspock.com/faq/0,1511,7199,00.html

I already posted this, but nobody seemed to pay attention since they all keep asking but yes, it's possible.

you seem to miss the shock of which I'm getting from seeing (supposed) guys of NSG having no recollection of such moments in there childhood

edit: also the link is silly I connected erection with whatever else I thought was going on as early as I can remember

you seem to miss the shock of which I'm getting from seeing (supposed) guys of NSG having no recollection of such moments in there childhood

I thought it was kind weird too, every boyfriend I have ever had told me some story about being 2 or 3 and getting an erection and being freaked out, every parent I know freaked out at least once when changing a diaper and their kid had an erection, and at least twice I have caught little boys (preschool age) playing with it and being amused that it changed.

It's life, penises get erections, that's what they do.

This is the logical conclusion of the Zero Tolerance mentality and the Religious/Marxist-Feminist dogma.

Whoa, that one came out of left field.

Simple normal sexual exploration and experimentation by kids is deemed abnormal and criminalized.

Sexual exploration is normal, but there is one thing here, and the problem being that there is an alleged assault and possible rape. It's not the exploration that's the problem, it's the alleged crime.

And of course the 8 and 9 year old "men" are responsible because after all girls can only be victims.

She's just the alleged victim at this point. The boys' guilt hasn't been proven or disproven before a court of law.

Now that the Government owns sex, the mob will determine what you can do with your body.

Sure it claims to but until there are surveillance cameras in every bedroom, they can piss and moan 'til they're blue in the face but it won't change a damn thing.

1. Calling someone an idiot on this forum is a very good way to get pointed and laughed at if that is the extent of your argument.

He is an idiot because he raised something unrelated to the discussion at hand. Its like debating something and the other person saying, "ooh, a brown pony! you obviously hate brown pony's!".

I thought it was kind weird too, every boyfriend I have ever had told me some story about being 2 or 3 and getting an erection and being freaked out, every parent I know freaked out at least once when changing a diaper and their kid had an erection, and at least twice I have caught little boys (preschool age) playing with it and being amused that it changed.

It's life, penises get erections, that's what they do.I believe you..

and just to confirm.. I just asked a few parents.. and they have seconded this information.

Modern Feminism is an outgrowth of 19th century socialism and heavily influenced by Marxism.

They and the religious movements found common cause in advancing and massively expanding a theory of diminished ability to consent which is the basis of all "statutory rape" laws.

Depends upon what you think rape is. Also it is common practice to describe events as Rape/assault/molestation solely on the basis of the age of the participants.

Technically it is now called "Sexual Assault", which is anything you do that is not specificlly invited and that has some purpose of sexual gratification. No touching of genitals is required either.

Can a 8/9 nine year old who by law can not consent to have sex be legally capable of rape? Physically this is of course possible.

Is there a link to the original article?

Whoa, that one came out of left field.

Literally.

I heard on the news this morning that the father of one of the boys said sex did happen, but that it was consensual. The reason they are being charged with rape is because neither party is old enough to consent. (Which brings up another point. If that is the case, shouldnt they both be tried for rape?)
these kids need some help, or disposed of (seriously)... if they are in prison for the next five years, how can they possibly help society as adults? Not quite. The father of one of the boys is asserting that the sex was consensual, and that the girl involved has only cried 'rape' after getting busted by her conservative parents to diminish her responsibility and get out of trouble.

What? Marxism has NOTHING to do with underage rape Marxism...has...everything...to...do...with...underage...rape

What? Marxism has NOTHING to do with underage sex/rape
Well, I guess in itself it wouldn't necessarily, but just for comparison, if they don't respect one's right to property (remember, Marx himself advocated abolishing all private propety) why would you expect them to respect one's right to choose not to have sex?

Are you suggesting that she raped them?
Well, as I mentioned, kids can be cruel, they presumably wouldn't know better. Perhaps she might have raped them and said they raped her, though yeah, we wouldn't know.

Well, I guess in itself it wouldn't necessarily, but just for comparison, if they don't respect one's right to property (remember, Marx himself advocated abolishing all private propety) why would you expect them to respect one's right to choose not to have sex?

Straw man.

Marxism...has...everything...to...do...with...underage...rape:confused:

Straw man.
Wait, so it's a straw man to say Marx advocated abolishing private property? Think back to your grade 11 economics textbook, he specifically said so.

Wait, so it's a straw man to say Marx advocated abolishing private property? Think back to your grade 11 economics textbook, he specifically said so.

Your interpretation that Marxism=we can use other people's bodies for our sexual gratification without their consent, is extremely silly

Wait, so it's a straw man to say Marx advocated abolishing private property? Think back to your grade 11 economics textbook, he specifically said so.

Yes it is, given that it is not what's actually written in The Communist Manifesto.

Marx advocated the abolition of wealth gained through doing nothing. If you've read any of his writings, you'd know he favoured the acquisition of wealth through hardwork.

From The Communist Manifesto, page 21, the first two paragraphs:

We Communists have been reproached with the desire of abolishing the right of personally acquiring property as the fruit of a man's own labour, which property is alleged to be the ground work to all personal freedom, activity and independence.

Hard-won, self-acquired, self-earned property! Do you mean the property of the petty artisan and of the small peasant, a form of property that preceded the bourgeois form? There is no need to abolish that; the development of industry has to a great extent already destroyed it, and is still destroying it daily.

He clearly advocates personal property through being hard working.

He spoke out against property used for social power and not for personal use.

Well, E Guano, at first I thought your post not making sense was only because you couldn't word it readably, but after seeing you explain yourself I realize that perhaps your points weren't as legitimate as I thought they might be...

Modern Feminism is an outgrowth of 19th century socialism and heavily influenced by Marxism.
Any basis for this, or did you just randomly throw in BS? What about Margaret Thatcher, who could be considered a symbol of both female empowerment (as Britain's first prime minister) and of capitalism? (IIRC from my history book she tried to reduce social welfare and according to Wiki tried to reduce the power of labour unions) What about female businesspeople?

They and the religious movements found common cause in advancing and massively expanding a theory of diminished ability to consent which is the basis of all "statutory rape" laws.
Diminished ability to consent? More like protecting those who we wouldn't have much reason to believe would be sexually informed, from exploitation, in a power imbalance, by an adult sexual partner.

I don't think it's quite as extreme a crime as society considers it, but I wouldn't say it's about diminishing ability to consent.

Depends upon what you think rape is. Also it is common practice to describe events as Rape/assault/molestation solely on the basis of the age of the participants.
I do agree that to call it rape would be misleading, as it wouldn't have the same kind of coerciveness as actually forcing someone to have sex, but it's a name, and I guess they're looking for a concise way to describe it without calling it paedophilia, which refers to sexual attraction to children, and without having to say "sex by someone who above the age of consent with someone who was below the age of consent" every time.

Technically it is now called "Sexual Assault", which is anything you do that is not specificlly invited and that has some purpose of sexual gratification.
IIRC from middle school assemblies about sexual abuse, it's not about sexual gratification but about power. Now I don't know much about the use of the term sexual assault, but if the same phrase is being used to describe raping someone as is being used to describe touching someone's breasts (which I heard someone here at MUN got in some pretty serious trouble for) that is on its own merits a problem but that doesn't in itself make rape less of a crime.

Can a 8/9 nine year old who by law can not consent to have sex be legally capable of rape?
What the hell? So if they're protected from sexual relations with adults, that somehow makes it irrelevant that they forced someone to have sex?

Modern Feminism is an outgrowth of 19th century socialism and heavily influenced by Marxism.

Yes feminism was an outgrowth of that century, a time when people were generally becoming more liberated from tradition.

However, I don't see how it's influenced by Marx so much as just a desire to seek equality at a time when nations were seeking independence from colonial powers.

Your source for this?

Your interpretation that Marxism=we can use other people's bodies for our sexual gratification without their consent, is extremely silly
Actually I was referring to Marx saying to abolish private property (which is a right) and as such making a comparison to suggest why someone would have been associating Marxism with sexual abuse since I was responding to someone who I got the impression didn't see why, though thing is I had the wrong impression to begin with since I was giving E Guano too much credit...

Yes it is, given that it is not what's actually written in The Communist Manifesto.

Marx advocated the abolition of wealth gained through doing nothing. If you've read any of his writings, you'd know he favoured the acquisition of wealth through hardwork.

From The Communist Manifesto, page 21, the first two paragraphs:

We Communists have been reproached with the desire of abolishing the right of personally acquiring property as the fruit of a man's own labour, which property is alleged to be the ground work to all personal freedom, activity and independence.

Hard-won, self-acquired, self-earned property! Do you mean the property of the petty artisan and of the small peasant, a form of property that preceded the bourgeois form? There is no need to abolish that; the development of industry has to a great extent already destroyed it, and is still destroying it daily.

He clearly advocates personal property through being hard working.

He spoke out against property used for social power and not for personal use.
Hmm... really? I got the impression from my grade 11 Economics textbook (which I left back in Gander... damn it) that since he said one of the "steps" towards a "dictatorship of the proletariat" society was the "abolition of private property"; I'll think about it and get back to you on that later...

Hmm... really? I got the impression from my grade 11 Economics textbook (which I left back in Gander... damn it) that since he said one of the "steps" towards a "dictatorship of the proletariat" society was the "abolition of private property"; I'll think about it and get back to you on that later...

It's possible that textbook had a bad interpretation of that line of though.

Marx was against property for social power and status, as well as that used for capitalist gain. He was in favour of property for personal use; property acquired through hard work.

It's possible that textbook had a bad interpretation of that line of though.

Marx was against property for social power and status, as well as that used for capitalist gain. He was in favour of property for personal use; property acquired through hard work.
Ah, interesting. Kinda reminds me of a political satire site that had the stereotypical opinions on different issues of people of different ideology labels, and of "what they agree with the communist manifesto about" the "conservatives" and the communists agreed on the obligation of all to labour while the "liberals" didn't... not that I agree with such ideology labels anyway, but just wanted to mention that.

8-9 year olds raping? Bull. They can't even ejaculate yet. Something doesn't seem to add up here.

&&

From my understanding vaginal rape is when the penis passes the labia majora so they wouldn't really have to get it up

.........

Then again I have very little idea of what i'm talking about


Rape doesn't have to mean "sex" (as in vaginal intercourse with one's penis). To my understanding, rape is any entry of any orifice without consent (& consent can not be given by those under the age of consent).

It's a sad story, if it's true. What would make young children do that to another child? :(

A screwed up childhood, no doubt.

The boys should be institutionalized for a while and learn about their crimes and how their conduct was inappropriate. If they do it again, then they need to be castrated.
That sounds like a better approach, teach them why what they did was wrong (since at that age they probably wouldn't have been taught that) but dole out the harsher punishment if they don't listen.

The boys should be institutionalized for a while and learn about their crimes and how their conduct was inappropriate. If they do it again, then they need to be castrated.

How exactly will castration help keep them from future abuses

How exactly will castration help keep them from future abuses

They will become great singers.
Which solves everything obviously.

I'm sorry...are US rape laws so antiquated that rape is only penile to vaginal penetration? Seriously?

Unbelievable:

§ 16-6-1. Rape


(a) A person commits the offense of rape when he has carnal knowledge of:

(1) A female forcibly and against her will; or

(2) A female who is less than ten years of age.

Carnal knowledge in rape occurs when there is any penetration of the female sex organ by the male sex organ. The fact that the person allegedly raped is the wife of the defendant shall not be a defense to a charge of rape.

Well at least they've recognised that you can in fact rape your wife...but apparently you can only rape a female. Or engage in the crime of 'forced homosexuality' if it's man on man, or 'forcible sodomy'. Nice to know only men can rape.

Join the fucking 21st century. Rape can include much more than penis into vagina.

Rape doesn't have to mean "sex" (as in vaginal intercourse with one's penis). To my understanding, rape is any entry of any orifice without consent (& consent can not be given by those under the age of consent).

.

See Neesikas post

Technically it is now called "Sexual Assault", which is anything you do that is not specificlly invited and that has some purpose of sexual gratification. No touching of genitals is required either.


Ever single state in the US has a their own definition of rape or sexual assault. You know this, right? I've posted the Georgia definition of rape...and it does not in any way conform to what is commonly understood as sexual assault here in Canada. So if the dyke feminists and the sullen communists have been at fault for expanding sexual crimes to include more than penis into vagina, your point is what? Also, the evidence that these evil agendas have not yet spread into certain states in the US means what...that Georgia for example, has avoided the scourge of lesbian communist feminists?