Bout time one of these got a sentence like a guy would
To better understand the injustice of this woman's punishment we must first understand the genesis (origin) of the law she violated.
Thinking back to the dawn of Man, at the time when Early Man first realized that in addition to feeling really good, doing "that" with a female is what knocked them up. And a pregnant cave-female was incapacitated, unable to help with the cave-work, a burden as it were, which ultimately produced another mouth to feed, which often was an extreme hardship in that pre-food stamp era.
At that time there were no courts, no judges, no
laws as we know them to be. There were certain things one just did not do -- and doing "that" to a young, healthy, cave-girl was one of those taboos. So when some horny cave-man got it on with some alluring, post-pubescent cave-girl, and got caught, the punishment for his act of primordial "statutory rape" was a bashed-in skull or castration with a flint-napped obsidian blade.
But do you suppose anyone cared if a young, healthy, working male got it on with some horny (or enterprising) tribal female? Why should they? How was he harmed? The fact is is wasn't. Not at all. Therefore no cause for concern.
I will not even speculate on when or exactly why the concern over horny young boys getting laid first arose. But whatever the cause(s) of the plainly redundant and pointless notion that it is at all possible for a woman, regardless of her age, to
rape a boy, there is little question that ignorance, stupidity and, mainly, puritanical religious hang-ups played, and continue to play, a major part.
When I was around fourteen/fifteen, I, like the vast majority of post-pubescent boys was primarily concerned with getting laid. I really didn't know if girls of that age felt the same, but I did know they vigorously resisted boys' efforts to pull their panties down. And the main reason for that is if they didn't they all would be knocked up by age fifteen. And therein lies the tale.
So this presumably moral reason behind the ridiculous notion that young boys need to be protected from horny women is predicated on the same kind of nonsensical indoctrination that brought about "Reefer Madness" notions about the
evil nature of marijuana. The simple fact is the only real harm a young male can experience from having natural, normal sexual relations with a female, regardless of her age, is that of venereal infection -- and the psychological complications which might arise from the lies and taboos imposed upon them by their ignorant, brainwashed, morally hypocritical elders.
