Boy, it sure is hard to know when you can rape (or, as they say at Yale, have “nonconsensual sex” with) a kid, isn’t it? We know the Catholic Church has a hell of a time figuring it out. Like, sure, there are “laws” about how you’re not supposed to have sex with someone who does not consent to having sex with you. And there are “laws” about how a minor cannot give consent because she or he is, you know, a kid. But those are really more like suggested guidelines, aren’t they? Like, okay, yeah, you probably shouldn’t fuck a kid, but what if she’s a totally hot kid and she’s wearing make-up and she runs with a fast crowd and she’s, like, TOTALLY asking for it, you can tell, she’s got that look? Talk about a gray area!
Take this poor, now-imprisoned sucker who fell victim to the allure of a 14-year-old inmate:
Louisiana prison officials and attorneys are trying to evade culpability in the rape of a 14-year-old juvenile inmate by claiming that the girl had a consensual relationship with the guard who molested her. According to the Tri-Parish Times, the victim solicited sex with now-incarcerated corrections officer Angelo Vickers during her imprisonment, an assertion that is at odds with Louisiana law, which stipulates that minors under the age of 17 do not possess the necessary judgment to consent to sex with adults. […]
“These girls in the detention center are not Little Miss Muffin,” one anonymous official told the Times.
See? Tricky! On the one hand, there’s the law that says you can’t do that, but on the other hand, shouldn’t you be able to do that if the girl is not Little Miss Muffin? At least across the pond the justice system takes a child’s Miss Muffinosity into consideration:
Anti-sexual abuse campaigners, among them the author who successfully put Jane Austen on the £10 note – before having to fend off the resulting torrent of online rape threats – have reacted angrily after it emerged that a man who admitted having sex with a 13-year-old girl walked free from court; while his victim was described by the judge and prosecution as sexually “predatory”. […]
The girl was accused in court of “egging her abuser on” and was described as “looking older” than her thirteen years, something the judge said he would consider in [the rapist] Wilson’s favour.
A man (or a gang of men) can hardly be expected to refrain from sexing a child when she’s so damned tempting. The New York Times made that clear a couple years ago, with its nuanced coverage of the gang-rape of an 11-year-old girl in Texas:
Residents in the neighborhood where the abandoned trailer stands—known as the Quarters—said the victim had been visiting various friends there for months. They said she dressed older than her age, wearing makeup and fashions more appropriate to a woman in her 20s. She would hang out with teenage boys at a playground, some said.
Okay, so yes, a group of men gang-raped a child in an abandoned trailer, but come on. She was wearing make-up and had older friends. That’s practically an engraved invitation to rape her, isn’t it? And even in those circumstances where it isn’t clear from her clothing or her make-up that she wants it, it’s still just so hard to tell whether it’s okay to fuck a child. Like this “whore” who got knocked up by her rapist:
The victim said he pushed her to have sex. Hoping to dissuade him, she told the boy she was on her period. But that didn’t work. He kept pushing her, physically overpowering the 95-pound girl.
“I was telling him ‘no,’ ‘no,’ ” she said, “but he wouldn’t stop.”
Okay, so she told him to stop and said “no,” but come on. How was her rapist supposed to know she meant it? No wonder her neighbors think she’s a slut. If she really hadn’t wanted to have sex with the guy, she wouldn’t have let him impregnate her, right?
Since it’s just so hard to know when you’re not supposed to rape a child (wink wink) and when you’re not supposed to rape a child but no seriously, DON’T DO THAT, here is a handy little guide to help those men who are so easily confused. Sure, it’s a little complex to comprehend at first, but if you commit it to memory — or hey, tattoo it on your dick if you’re not that good with memorization — you should be able to navigate these oh-so-muddy waters. And, bonus, it doesn’t apply just to fucking kids. It’s a universal catch-all rule that applies to sex with anyone.
So here it is: When can you have nonconsensual sex with someone? NEVER. Not even if she’s really hot or mature for her age. Not even if she’s wearing make-up. Not even if she has older friends. Not even if she’s “egging” you on. Not even if she’s drunk. Not even if she’s a total slutbag who has had sex with, like, a million other dudes so one more shouldn’t make a difference. Not even if you’re really horny. Not even if she only says no twice. Not even if it’s a day that ends in “y” or pigs flew by your window or you watched some porno where the chick said no but seemed to like it or your mother didn’t love you or some Republican said there are varying degrees of rape and some of it isn’t really rape or you think you can get away with it and no one will ever know.
Because if you do sex to someone who does not give you her permission to do sex to her — or cannot give you her permission because of how she is a child — you are a rapist and a bad person and if there is in fact a hell, you will burn in it. Even if a judge takes sympathy on you and the legal system lets you off the hook with a warning (or, in Yale’s case, a written reprimand). It is wrong and bad, and you are wrong and bad, and seriously, it should not be that difficult to understand that you should only fuck grown adult women (or men, whatever floats your boat, we don’t judge — UNLESS YOU’RE RAPING SOMEONE) who can and do give their consent for you to fuck them.
There. Hope that clears things up. You’re welcome.