Rape and Adultery

Below is a very old post of mine.  It is actually the first meaningful post I made on the internet, before I knew anything about incel or the men's movement.  I am posting it now because I need to refer to it elsewhere.  This post is very controversial, but since CoAlpha isn't very active right now, I see no harm in posting it here.



Why is rape a crime beyond just being assault?  The answer is that it is an evolutionary crime against a woman to force her to have children with a man not of her choice.  In evolutionary terms, our main purpose is to reproduce.  The success of our genes is determined by how well we reproduce.  For a woman, one of the most important things that she can control for reproduction is the choice of the man to have children with.  To force her to have children with a man not of her choice causes extreme emotional pain precisely because it is so important in evolutionary terms.

Compare this to the rape of a man.  If one thinks of a woman raping a man, it is almost comical because it is so meaningless.  It is meaningless because it has no evolutionary impact, or may even have a slight positive impact for the man.  Women can only have a limited number of children, so they must be selective in sex.  Men can have an unlimited number of children, so men have no need to be selective in sex.  A feminist may raise the issue of a man raping a man.  But this is simply assault and nothing more.  So the point is that rape is a crime against women, not men.

Now let's look at adultery.  In ancient times, when the seventh commandment was written, adultery meant sex between a man and a married woman.  Only in modern times has adultery included extramarital sex of husbands.  Again, this makes sense in evolutionary terms.  The crime of adultery is to cheat a man into raising children who aren't his.  The basic concept of marriage is a contract where the woman pledges her sexual fidelity to guarantee that the children will be her husband's, and in return, the husband pledges to support the family.  Adultery is a violation of this contract.  Just as rape is an evolutionary crime again women, adultery is an evolutionary crime against men.  And this is why men feel extreme emotional pain when cheated on, just as women feel pain when raped.  The argument that condoms change this because they allow sex without reproduction misses the point that our feelings evolved before condoms existed.  Adultery with a condom is just as painful for a husband as rape with a condom is for a woman.

Women today claim that extramarital sex is the same regardless of which gender does it.  But this is nonsense.  What women really want from men is commitment.  In societies like ours, with unstable marriages, women are insecure and so they over-react to any sign of lack of commitment.  Extramarital sex of a man is only meaningful as a proxy for lack of commitment.  This is why wives constantly probe husbands about any kind of relationship the husband has with women, whether friendship or work-related or whatever.  In contrast, a husband only really cares about whether his wife has sex with another man, and anything else is irrelevant.  So the point is that adultery is really a crime against a husband, committed by his wife and another man.

I believe these two crimes are very similar.  The analogy is: rape is to women what adultery is to men.  How does our society handle these two crimes?  Rape is severely punished, but adultery is not only legal, but is actually protected.  Consider the mirror image of this, where adultery would be severely punished, but rape would not only be legal, but would be protected.  In other words, in this mirror image society, resisting rape would be considered assault.  This is analogous to a man who catches his wife in bed with another man, and attacks them and is then charged with assault.  All the man was doing was resisting adultery.  Of course such a mirror image society is unimaginable because men have a basic sense of decency that women lack, so we would never inflict such a society on women.  But women have inflicted our feminist society on men.  Historically, rape and adultery have been considered similar crimes.  In some societies, rape was only punished with fines.  And in many societies, a man had the right to attack, and even kill, another man who had sex with his wife.

Are either of these two crimes ever justified?  Let's start with adultery.  Imagine a society where divorce is illegal and a woman is married to a man who changed and became worthless and didn't have sex with her.  I believe that adultery is justified in this case, primarily because she does not have the option to divorce.  No one should ever be denied the opportunity to fulfill their basic evolutionary needs.

So now we can consider if rape is every justified.  Imagine a society where prostitution is illegal and women constantly provoke men.  Of course, there is no need to imagine this society, because it exists in the USA.  A single man in this society is in a similar situation to the woman described above for whom adultery is justified.  Single men in this society have no outlet for their evolutionary need for sex, so just as the married woman above was justified in adultery, men here are justified in rape.  Banning prostitution harms men the way banning divorce harms women.  If women don't want to be raped, they should push for legal prostitution and they should dress more modestly.

Nazi Germany serves as a benchmark of evil, but I think American women are worse.  In Nazi Germany, the Nazis had to pick particularly sadistic members of society to operate the concentration camps.  The only crime of the average German was to look the other way.  If the average German had been forced to see the suffering of the Jews in the concentration camps, they probably would have had second thoughts.  Compare this to American women.  The average American woman not only tolerates the suffering of single men, but actively contributes to it with their provocative dress.  If confronted by the suffering of single men caused by sexual deprivation, the likely reaction of American women would be to giggle.  In Nazi Germany, most Germans were not active in torturing people, but in Feminazi America, most women are active in torturing men.  I do not think such women deserve any sympathy if they are raped, any more than Nazis convicted of war crimes deserve sympathy if they were punished.

The rape of most American women is justified because there is no other legal means for many men to get sex in America.  This is similar to the reason that I feel Robin Hood was justified in stealing from the rich.  In England at the time, there was no social mobility, and the poor had no other way of getting enough money other than to steal.  What is normally a crime becomes justified when alternative means of meeting a person's basic needs are denied.

But saying rape is justified is a weaker statement than saying American women deserve to be raped, so let me explain this.  Is a starving person justified in stealing from a rich person?  I think so.  Does the rich person deserve to be stolen from?  Not if the starving person's condition isn't the rich person's fault.  In fact, in this case, the rich person would be justified in defending his property from the starving person.  Here we have two people in conflict, each of whom is justified in his actions, and neither of whom deserves this conflict.  But now let's look at the case where the starving person is starving because of actions by the rich person.  In this case, not only is the starving person justified in stealing from the rich person, but the rich person deserves to be stolen from.  This is why Robin Hood is remembered as a hero, because not only did he provide for the poor who were in need, but he also stole from the rich who were the cause of the poor people's poverty, and therefore who deserved to be stolen from.

My argument regarding rape is the same, just applied to sex as opposed to wealth.  An American woman who dresses provocatively and opposes legal prostitution is a cause of sexual starvation among single men in America, and therefore, not only is her rape justified, but she deserves to be raped.

I halfway agree. I cannot say that i agree that women deserve to be raped but i do think women need to start realizing how their actions are affecting men. Think about it like this.... Women are like people who go swimming in the ocean when they are bleeding and the sharks that smell the blood are sexually frustrated men.  Now we can all agree that a person who goes swimming in the ocean when they are bleeding is stupid , or at least naive? But do they really deserve to be attacked by a shark? I dont think so... But the shark doesnt deserve the blame either... He was just following his instincts... Nature can be cruel. Its the same with women who get raped... They consciously or unconsciously behave in ways that attract sexually frustrated men and they respond.

I can't get down with this. If I catch a rape in progress, I'm likely to perform castration on the spot. That's just me though.

As I said, this is a very old post and, to be honest, the subject no longer interests me.  I only posted it because I needed to refer to it elsewhere.

fschmidt wrote

Why is rape a crime beyond just being assault?  The answer is that it is an evolutionary crime against a woman to force her to have children with a man not of her choice.  

For "her choice" I would substitute "her family's/father's choice". Other than that I would agree. I don't see how it is really possible to have a moral relationship with stray Western females and certainly don't regard them as my fellow citizens with civil rights and such, as they obviously do not feel this way about me. Hence you could argue that they were simply an unclaimed free resource and in addition to raping them, it would be morally permissible to do whatever you wanted to them, subject only to the usual animal cruelty considerations.    

Fs-guy had it right the first time.

A Sleeping Revolutionary wrote

I can't get down with this. If I catch a rape in progress, I'm likely to perform castration on the spot. That's just me though.

That is stupid. Watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UL1B3DSZSo

Edit: Link is now fixed. I am still getting used to Nabble.

Cornfed, please fix the link.

This video is actually an excellent explanation of why I believe in tribalism.

Cornfed wrote

That is stupid. Watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UL1B3DSZSo

Darn. Had high hopes for you. Why'd ya have to ruin it by watching Aurini? Disappointing. I'm not going to trip, but if I catch a rape in progress it's a wrap (for the rapist). And dude should be castrated. You're not exactly painting the site as a good place to separate from HA. It actually looks worse. I mean, I can't say I've seen Winston or any of his goons typing up stuff like this. He may get butthurt when women don't give him the time of day, but he doesn't go this far with his contempt.

I get being angry, but this is a bit....sick.

Here are is how a sane person sees your arguments fschmidt:

-Rape is not that bad, because back when we were cavemen, males needed to insert there semen into unwilling females, and that helped us reproduce. And this concept totally applies today, where humans are more cognitively developed and morally sound. Plus the fact that the females experience emotional pain is precisely why it is so important evolutionary. Trust me, that last sentence totally makes sense.

-Rape is between a man and a woman. Gay rape doesn't count because it doesn't fit my narrow definition of rape, plus that would invalidate my entire argument... anyways let me continue with my well formulated and cohesive post.

-In ancient times, a bunch of flea-ridden religious fanatics put adultery on the same level as rape. And I will use this infallible truth to support my view. How come adultery is acceptable and rape isn't? It's not like the victims of rape suffer physical pain, emotional trauma, and are unwillingly forced into submission? right? Exactly the same as adultery, no difference at all. But for some reason, our dystopian society allows adultery, which causes more damage to men than rape does to women. Oppression is what it is. Oh and BTW, only women do adultery, because men never cheat in marriages, and if they do, it's not adultery. Because fuck you, that's why.

-We live in a world where women are shameless temptresses, who dress provocatively, not because it's their right to express themselves, but purely to incite lustful urges in men. And we men, have absolutely no control of our sexual urges, because we are savage animals, driven by instinct. Therefore it's well within our right to physically subdue and have sex with them against their will.

-There is no legal means for many men to get sex in America, except rape. Because there are NO legal brothels (cough*lasvegas*cough); and starting a healthy relationship? Pfffffft, consensual sex is for pussies. Rapists are the Robin Hoods of society, because robbing the corrupt rich to altruistically care for the poor, is ABSOLUTELY the same as fulfilling your selfish desires at the expense other's suffering.

-We single men are suffering, kinda like the plight of Jews in concentration camps. Because sexual deprivation is arguably worse than being tortured, starved and imprisoned in a crowded hell-hole. Rape is like a starving child stealing from a rich person, because not having sex is as bad as malnourishment with the risk of death. Like the starving child, forced to steal food for survival, we men are forced to rape women. Because food is as important a basic need as pussy. (seriously dude, watch porn or have a wank, it'll relieve your sexual tension)

-To conclude, raping women is fine, not only that, but women DESERVE to be raped. Because my malformed and misguided arguments prove that. Peace out bitches.

OK, Seriously dude, your views are scary, and I'm afraid you'll end up on a registered sex offender list, or worse, in jail. Maybe you had a shitty relationship with a bitch partner, or maybe you're just angry because she cheated on you. There's still hope you'll find a caring person, don't spend the rest of your life hatefully brooding because you've been wronged in the past. But first thing's first, be real with yourself, your post is dumb as fuck, and admitting it would be your first step to recovery.

PsychicTurtle this is a free speech site and your welcomed to disagree. However we do not welcome personal attacks. If you want to be taken seriously you should focus on the content and not the author.

All I did was re-write his arguments (which I thought were dumb, malformed and insane) in what I thought was a humorous way, and then I expressed concern for his emotional well-being because I felt his belief may lead him to commit a sex crime. It was not my intention to attack anyone personally, in fact I don't believe I did. Would you show me where I may have done so and why?

PT, did you perchance come from any of the links I left to this place?

It depends, if you're the ambitious misanthrope, then yeah.

I don't understand this comment at all. If you got through my links you probably know who I am very well. In any case, if I were fschmidt I'd delete your posts and ban you. Freedom of speech can only apply to people with an IQ above room temperature. Nothing in your "debunking" has anything to do with what he said and your post is nothing but strawmen, insane fabrications  and name-calling. If you're a sane person I am a Peruvian housewife.

PsychicTurtle, I like your name.  And I realize that you won't come out of your psychic shell.  That's normal these days, unfortunately.

Your definition of "sane" matches Stalin's, namely that those who agree with you are sane and those who disagree are insane.  Again, in this you are not alone.  Most members of modern culture are much closer to Stalin than to the Enlightenment.

Your comments are typical of a member of modern culture.  Modern culture uses ridicule rather then concrete arguments to attack opposing views.  This works quite well since most people are too stupid to follow arguments, but don't want to be on the side that is being ridiculed.

You don't have to worry about me ending up on a registered sex offender list or in jail, at least until your kind manage to repeal the legal right to free speech.  I have been happily married for 23 years.

I don't know who you are, and I don't care. And I was sarcastically mocking his post, ignorance at this level is not worthy of a debunking. What I see here is a circle-jerk of misogynists with beliefs that have no place in the 21st century. You say my post is riddled with fallacies, but don't even bother to point them out. Hell, the admin can't even differentiate "your" from "you're", so I doubt he could hold his own in an argument. And you know what? Stalin's an asshole, but at least he didn't believe all women deserve to be raped.

I'm absolutely certain of my sanity, so you can go back to cleaning your kitchen Fernanda.

thatincelblogger wrote

In any case, if I were fschmidt I'd delete your posts and ban you.

I think it is valuable to highlight the difference between people like us who use logical arguments and modern people like PsychicTurtle who only use ridicule and personal attacks.

I don't understand what kind of a debunking do you want but "that's not what he said" and then basically copy pasting what he did say or pointing out that what you're claiming doesn't exist in the text. Maybe fschmidt will try some other way to point out your nonsense but I don't see any.

I was wrong in the previous post. These aren't even strawmen. Strawmen at least tend to have some similarity with original points. But your view of fschmidt's text has absolutely none with what he is actually saying.