Feminazi Rape Laws Gone Berserk

Here. From 2008.

Two boys, 15 and 16 years old, were with an 18 year old woman and another young woman. The second woman sees the bad vibes surrounding the situation and gets the Hell out of there fast. The 18 year old sticks around, but things get ugly.

First boy apparently date-rapes the girl. Second boy asks, “Me next?” Woman says fine, but you need to stop when I tell you. As soon as he’s in, she says, “Stop!” Guy pounds a few more pile-drivers for five more seconds, then pulls out.

Later the ditzy broad goes out to MacDonald’s with the two guys. She makes out in the restaurant with the first “rapist” and gives the second “rapist” her phone number. Later she files rape charges against both boys.

*The facts around this case are quite a bit murkier than the site I linked to made out. Please see the comments for details. However, the fact remains that under the Female Rule that the feminist crazies want, men will go down on rape for continuing with initially consensual sex for five seconds after she tells you to stop. That’s the take home point here.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

22 thoughts on “Feminazi Rape Laws Gone Berserk”

  1. This kind of crap infuriates me.

    These goddamned feminists are destroying the true meaning of “rape” when they insist that something like this is rape.

  2. Totally agree. These people are giving rape a bad name.
    However – could the woman in the above story ( which I’m not sure I believe anyway) not be done for statutory rape and be hounded for the rest of her life, unable to work at anything, forced to sleep under bridges, not allowed a passport and all that stuff under that law whose name I can’t remember? What a weird, sadistic, arbitrary ‘injustice system’ you’ve got, and what a weird morality! I read a detailed history of what happened to one female schoolteacher who got done for having sex with a pupil (not very young) and how her life was destroyed as above, and I understand her case was not unusual.
    I can’t imagine how the case above ever came to court, if it’s true – any links?

    1. The first line of the post links to a discussion board which has a non-functional imbedded link for the primary source. The posted Salon link has another non-functional link for a primary source.

  3. Rob,

    You need to look into the case further. The first man plead guilty to second degree rape. Let’s look what happened:

    http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/2006/11/27/rape/index.html

    The case that prompted the court ruling is undoubtedly messy. The plaintiff in the case was driving two guys in her car; one raped her (and ultimately pleaded guilty to the crime). Allegedly, the other passenger then took his “turn” but said he didn’t want to rape the plaintiff, who felt that she couldn’t refuse him, and consented to have sex with him provided he stop when she asked him to. They had sex, and at one point she did ask him to stop — and he did, after “about five or so seconds,” the plaintiff has said.

    The second defendant, Maouloud Baby, “was convicted of first-degree rape and sentenced to five years in prison,” the Post reports, acknowledging that “a new trial for Mr. Baby seems warranted.”

    http://www.law.umaryland.edu/academics/journals/mdlr/print/68-4_9.html

  4. Considering the first guy plead guilty to rape.. I suspect there was, at some point, a threat of violence from him. I doubt the courts accept a plea a 15 year and convict a 16 year old (both were tried as adults..) of rape unless there was pretty compelling evidence that force or more likely in this situation, a threat of force involved. The 16 year asking if he could hit it .. and saying he didn’t want to rape her is very suspect. Why would he say he didn’t want to rape her? (especially in light of the fact that the first guy copped a guilty plea..) I strongly suspect that both guys had been run through the criminal system a few times and that the second guy was playing a game so that he could “hit it” without (in his mind..) being guilty of rape. I am guessing there is a lot left out that we haven’t heard about.

  5. The Washington Post ran an article about this case back in November 2006. The details make the situation even murkier.

    Supposedly, the three went to McDonald’s after this sexual encounter. Supposedly, the girl hugged the first guy and gave the second guy her phone number.

    The police were called later after she recounted the story to someone.

  6. Supposedly, the three went to McDonald’s after this sexual encounter. Supposedly, the girl hugged the first guy and gave the second guy her phone number.

    Yes I saw that…. I don’t agree with the Romano /etc crowd but I have heard of cases where women were sexually assaulted (and sometimes kidnapped and held for an extended period of time.. ) but by the classic definition they were raped. Think Stockholm syndrome or Patty Hearst.

    One older guy (he looked like he was in his late 50s.. ) would kidnap teenage women, hold them in his basement for a while raping them and then eventually take them out to dinner and things like that. He would do this for a while and eventually release them until one women when they were at a bar, went up to the bartender and said this man is holding me against my will. I’ll try to find the case.

  7. This whole case involves the issue of consent. Courts are having to wrangle over such things as “What constitutes consent?” and “When has a woman withdrawn consent?”

    And now “How much time do you have to comply once consent has been withdrawn?”

    Is it possible to withdraw a withdrawal of consent? That is, if you act as if all is forgiven, does that mean it was okay that he didn’t comply?

  8. To TomC

    ” TomC
    February 7, 2010 at 9:31 am

    by Salon link I mean the post below with the link to the Salon article.”

    Both links work for me.

  9. To Alpha

    “This whole case involves the issue of consent. Courts are having to wrangle over such things as “What constitutes consent?” and “When has a woman withdrawn consent?”

    And now “How much time do you have to comply once consent has been withdrawn?”

    The issue is moot if the consent was given under threat or legitimate fear of violence. Considering a prosecutor and a judge were convinced the first man committed rape (and he copped a guilty plea…) I have a tendency to think the actions of the second man were at least highly suspicious. Juries and judges aren’t really in the habit of handing out 15 year sentences to 16 year olds for consensual sex. It appears that the objection of the appellate court was that the Jury was not given instructions as to whether they thought the second act was committed under the auspices of a threat of violence.

    1. So “yes” does not always mean “yes.” What a woman actually says is irrelevant. And what she does is irrelevant, too.

      The only thing that matters is what the guy says and does.

      Is this it?

    2. Let’s wrap this up now…

      Girl goes out with two guys, right? Ok, one “rapes” her, really date-rapes her. No weapon, no physical violence. Then the 2nd guy asks if he can do it too, she says sure, just stop when I say stop, he keeps going for 5 more seconds, gets a rape charge.

      All of that aside, afterwards, she goes to a coffeeshop with her “rapists,” makes out with her first “rapist” and gives the second “rapist” her phone number.

      LOL.

      Yeah, some “rape.” 😉

  10. To Alpha Unit:

    So “yes” does not always mean “yes.” What a woman actually says is irrelevant. And what she does is irrelevant, too.

    The only thing that matters is what the guy says and does.

    Is this it?

    No it is not it. I’ll reiterate… what is relevant is whether there was a threat or actual violence. If I show you a handgun and say hand over your wallet and you say yes I will. You said yes but were you comfortable with handing me your wallet.

    If the woman is hanging out with the two guys and willingly has sex with the first guy with no threat or implication of violence (which I would say is doubtful since he copped a plea of rape…) and then willingly has sex with sex with the second guy has second thoughts a few seconds later… then no.. I would not say it was rape. But.. I have to wonder why a jury and a judge thought it was. As I said we only know parts of the story. But what we do know is that a 15 year old as an adult and was charged with and accepted a plea of second degree rape and apparently testified against the second guy.

    1. I agree with you, Uncle Milton, that the particulars of these cases are important. But the rulings and their implications are even more important. That’s what I focus on.

  11. Yeah, some “rape.”

    Hmmm, If she thought it would save her life. Yeah, it could be rape and I have heard of successfully prosecuted cases where such things did happen… in those cases the guys had originally said things like.. “I’m going to blow your head off…” and then later they were seen in public with their victims. If it could be reasonably established that the victim was playing along to save her life. Yep it’s rape.

    As for the nonsense about equating fraud and rape.. yeah… that’s absolute nonsense. Fraud is fraud…not rape.

  12. Here’s some further description of the case which gives more information on the case:

    http://www.courts.state.md.us/opinions/cosa/2006/225s05.pdf

    If the stated information is correct.. it definitely sounds as if the first guy raped her. The situation for the second guy is less clear.. but.. pretty fucking bad idea to be guy number two when guy number one was forcing the woman to have sex by sitting on her chest and forcing his dick into her mouth when she was saying no.

  13. Reading the document posted by Uncle Milton (thanks) it really does appear to be a rape or sexual assault. What happened to the woman is a lot darker this blog post’s glib and callous characterization of the event.

    1. The case was misrepresented to me, and nothing in the lengthy debate at the first post clarified the truth of the case. The take-home point, though, is in the asterisked part at the end.

      The post has been edited.

  14. You know what I would like young women to understand? That they have to assume responsibility for their own safety and well-being, yes.

    But they also need to realize that they mustn’t give mixed signals. If you don’t want to be sexually involved with a guy, then you mustn’t do anything that would lead him to assume that you do.

    I realize that young people don’t always think clearly, but this is something girls really need to have instilled in them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *