[Iluminaughty]

http://theantifeminist.com/article-statu...nmalafide/


Excellent article at InMalaFide on statutory rape laws by a ‘Giovanni Dannato’ that everyone here should read :

Statutory Rape Laws are a Subsidy on Female Sexual Market Value


Statutory rape laws as we know them are a product of the Victorian period. These laws were originally made to protect the economically valuable virginity of unmarried young women. It was also a reaction of working class men to the force of hypergamy — the female instinct to select men of higher status. It was a way to prevent wealthier, more powerful men from monopolizing young working class women in rapidly growing urban areas.

As the 20th century progressed, virginity was no longer a prerequisite for marriage. The original justifications for expanded statutory rape laws became obsolete and forgotten… but they remained for a reason.

Female power in society was growing rapidly as the industrial world matured. The old laws very much benefited women of reproductive age. Females 18-35 found themselves miraculously protected from the depredations of their fiercest competitors — the up and coming ones. The temporal conveyor belt that ruthlessly cycled women out of the market was effectively slowed down by 3-4 years.

[Iluminaughty]

I can't find the rest of the article. Most of the articles from inmalafide where it orginated have been deleted. Giovanni Dannato discusses it here in this interview.

http://reasonradionetwork.com/20120111/t...ni-dannato

[Iluminaughty]

Entire Article:

Statutory rape laws as we know them are a product of the Victorian period. These laws were originally made to protect the economically valuable virginity of unmarried young women. It was also a reaction of working class men to the force of hypergamy — the female instinct to select men of higher status. It was a way to prevent wealthier, more powerful men from monopolizing young working class women in rapidly growing urban areas.

As the 20th century progressed, virginity was no longer a prerequisite for marriage. The original justifications for expanded statutory rape laws became obsolete and forgotten… but they remained for a reason.

Female power in society was growing rapidly as the industrial world matured. The old laws very much benefited women of reproductive age. Females 18-35 found themselves miraculously protected from the depredations of their fiercest competitors — the up and coming ones. The temporal conveyor belt that ruthlessly cycled women out of the market was effectively slowed down by 3-4 years.

Females have always been able to benefit more from cooperation while males have had to spend more of their energy on competition. This is the natural result of a zero sum situation in which one man can fertilize countless women. The sex that has to break ranks first and compete among itself ‘loses.’ The party that can cooperate more effectively for longer is able to dictate the terms.

However, statutory rape laws have distorted the biological game even more strongly in favor of women.

We might call the resulting trend ‘hyper-hypergamy.’

Though females have always been the gatekeepers of human reproduction, their enormous power had a major limiting factor. They had only a handful of years at peak value in which they had to settle with the best mate they could find. If they did not hurry, their opportunity would be squandered and a new generation of young women would be taking their pick of the richest, most desirable men.

Indeed, it does much to explain our present world if we understand how statutory rape laws and other pro-female policies have changed society. Feminism and the overall decline in female standards of behavior can be explained by a shift in the balance of power. Females now simply have fewer restraints on their behavior.

Unfortunately for women, the present distorted order is unsustainable:

1) A group that adopts Victorian-style statutory rape laws will experience a drop in overall fertility and an increase in birth defects.

If a society tries to keep its most fertile and desirable women from reproducing while promoting the interests of women who are in the twilight of their reproductive years, the rate of fertility and the quality of offspring must fall relative to those societies that subscribe to biological reality.

2) Historically, it often takes a man a decade or two after reaching adulthood to get established.

It’s sink or swim — of all the men who ever lived, only a minority managed to have kids. The male’s main advantage is more time — nearly twice as much as a female has. Hyper-hypergamy encourages women to hold out for an additional 3-4 years before bearing children. Meanwhile, men must compete more intensely than ever to secure women with fewer remaining reproductive years.

When older women have artificially high value, the man who can finally afford a family at age 35-40 is going to have difficulty achieving reproductive success when the most fertile women are out of his range. At present, a 35 year-old man is going to be lucky to find a mate more than a few years younger. A woman past age 30 is already beyond her best reproductive years. The probability of genetic defects in any resulting children is much higher, assuming the female is still able to conceive. Thus, we predictably see ‘fertility therapy’ growing into a huge industry in the Westernized world.

Where hyper-hypergamy reigns, the only men deemed fit for fertile wombs are those born into wealth, and a handful of ‘naturals,’ lucky celebrities and entrepreneurs who make it big while they’re young.

3) When women are approaching the height of their beauty in their later teens, they are one of society’s most powerful means of motivating men to aspire to great things.

Great civilizations are those that find constructive ways to channel the abundant energies of their men. The right incentives must be there. Not only does a great reward spur men on to great deeds, men who perceive that the best is given to the corrupt and undeserving will rebel and look for ways to undermine the system. Societies that fail to offer their men sufficient incentives to act in the collective interest perish.

This said — we might look at who the present society rewards with many of its best young women…

An assortment of high school athletes, class presidents, and homecoming kings who have yet to accomplish or contribute anything. They are showered with society’s greatest gifts early in life for throwing balls around, attending parties, and generally acting as thugs.

In short, high school football teams get a steady supply of young virgins while all other males are expected to work hard for their leavings for the rest of their lives.

What message is sent to the majority of high school males who see these thugs monopolizing the sexual market as part of their formative experience? Will they be predisposed towards trusting or helping the society that demands their effort and productivity? Most will not think any of this out on a conscious level, but they will follow their self-interest all the same.

Where might we predict that a society like this is headed?

Conclusion:

Victorian-style statutory rape laws may seem a sweet deal for many women, but both men and women lose in the long term.

Women 18-35 enjoy heightened social status, but they lose some of their most valuable reproductive years in their teens — before environmental factors have had a chance to damage the supply of eggs they carry with them from birth. Thus, the two years from 16-18 are far more biologically valuable to her than are the years from 33-35 in which she’s spending thousands of dollars on fertility therapy and dealing with exponentially greater odds of conceiving a child with Down syndrome.

With biology already heavily skewed in favor of women, further inflation in the sexual market creates an untenable situation for men.

The resulting cutthroat competition interferes with the ability of men to cooperate and accomplish goals that further the aims of society.

Society becomes less stable and less innovative.

Social unrest and upheaval become inevitable.

Ultimately, an understanding of underlying sexual politics gives one a much better model for predicting the crowd’s behavior than does focusing on individual movements and ideologies.

Giovanni writes at 6 Heretic’s Way.

[Samseau]

I don't understand why a man between 35-40 can't bag a girl her in twenties to have kids

[BLarsen]

Interesting article, but what exactly is the point? Is there a desired outcome? Access to 16 year old poon?

[xsplat]

I think he's stretching a few points past the point of hyperbole.

It's like people saying that we won't have any more Ipods soon because of a complete civilization collapse because betas are finding it harder to marry virgin pussy. People stretch the truth to the point of absurdity in order to further their sexual agenda.

[RawGod]

I pretty much agree with this article. While you can't really "prove" this kind of argument, it has a lot of explanatory power.

It's odd to get a little older and see changes in society happening at a fast pace. One of these changes over the last 10 to 15 years is women's and beta males shrill intolerance of a few years age gap between men and women. There has to be a structural, sociological explanation for this such as the article mentions - feminists want to reduce the competition.

The age of consent in Australia is 16. Back in the 80s and 90s, 16-17 year old women were fair game for guys in their 20s. They were considered adults sexually, which they certainly are. Now it's not acceptable if the guy is more than maybe 2 years older. I mean it still happens but only the more alpha guys can cut through the social pressure.

[Bad Hussar]

Sounds like the author has a bit of a chip on his shoulder because he wasn't a jock in high school. As unbelievable as it may seem to him there are plenty of women sleeping with all kinds of guys. People adapt to their strengths and get by/ahead. There are 101 ways to skin a cat.

As for legal age of consent. 16 seems a reasonable age to me. At 18, which I understand is the AOC in many US states, you without a doubt have 1000's of couples breaking the law every freakin day. It just makes a mockery of the law.

Frankly I think a lot of men pay far too much attention what feminists think. We've already figured out what they about, and that they are really just a protection racket . Now, rather than getting worked up, just sit back and be amused at how worked up they get about trivialities.