Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

Experiment Do you agree with bilateral rape laws?

Do you agree?

  • Yes

    Votes: 13 72.2%
  • No

    Votes: 5 27.8%

  • Total voters
    18
trying to ascend

trying to ascend

Oldcel KHHV
★★★★★
Joined
Aug 30, 2020
Posts
15,962
That if two people who can't consent have sex, both of them are legally persecuted.

I guess those laws are better than the romeo and juliet ones, since they don't violate the AOC/are more consistent.

[UWSL]I don't know why almost no country has them in their jurisdiction[/UWSL]
 
Last edited:
Sure, whatever ruins sex for foids and normies is fine with me.
 
Lowering the age of consent would be a much better law
 
Any of both since foids will get less punishment anyway.

AOC are pretty consistent as long you are in late teens-early 20s. In my country starts at 14 with 5 years gap at most. If you are 18 yo you can have wkth 14 yo, if you are 19 yo you can have with 14 yo, if you are 20 yo you can have with 15 yo and if you are 21 yo you can have with 16 yo. aif you are 22 you can have with 17 yo. I got 60 % warning for suggesting that flr youngcels despite pedocels (old ass niggas wanting girls of such ages or below) post things like "foids peak their prime at 12".

In US starts at 14 with age gaps of 3 years at most. So if 18 yo can have with a 15 yo. If you are 19 yo you can have with 16 yo. If you are 20 yo you can have with 17 yo.

In Brazil AOC is limitless for 14 yo or above. Age gaps only apply to 12 yo and 13 yo. So you must be 17 yo to have a relationship with a 12 yo or you must be 18 yo to have a relationship with a 13 yo.

If you lost your prime years playing vidya is your fault honey. No way to be bluepilled after HS. :feelsdevil:
 
Last edited:
No, it sounds like some stupid "technicality"-esque law that would end up being quite retarded in practice.

Imagine all of the cases of drunk people who had sex -- suddenly everyone now is a "rapist" because they can have sex and take drugs. I don't see what's to be gained here by enacting dual-punishment when the question that rings is, who really cares? It'd be a useless law like most.

This reminds me of that argument-case where people postulated that consent must be REPEATEDLY MADE THROUGHOUT SEXUAL ACTIVITIES akin to some comedy-skit. IOW, it was presumed two people or more would have to continuously give verbal or some written consent during sexual activity OVER AND OVER AGAIN or else it leaves room for "rape" or other legal actions and negative viewpoints. What fucking law or government should give a damn about personal interactions between people in most cases, if not all? LEAVE THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF ALL THINGS UNLESS IT'S TO BENEFIT YOU, NOT POTENTIALLY PERSECUTE OR PROSECUTE YOU FOR "BREAKING LAWS" OF ANY DEGREE OF STUPIDITY!

The only "laws" that should exist should be common sense, which many know & follow -- the rest are just to take your money & instill fear. Things like subjects of "rape," drugs, personal habits in private, freedom of speech/internet/etc. should always be of least importance in "legal systems." Focus more on fairness -- tax Chad for having good genes so he can trickle down money for genetic engineering or some shit. Fuck all of these "laws" that seek to only await those to "punish" for breaking them, under the guise of THE GOVERNMENT STEALING FROM YOU AS "DISCIPLINE."
 
Last edited:
No, it sounds like some stupid "technicality"-esque law that would end up being quite retarded in practice.
Imagine all of the cases of drunk people who had sex -- suddenly everyone now is a "rapist" because they can have sex and take drugs. I don't see what's to be gained here by enacting dual-punishment when the question that rings is, who really cares? It'd be a useless law like most.
So you care about people being able to have sex?

Sex defender
 
Lower the AoC + Bilateral rape law

Any of both since foids will get less punishment anyway.

AOC are pretty consistent as long you are in late teens-early 20s. In my country starts at 14 with 5 years gap at most. If you are 18 yo you can have wkth 14 yo, if you are 19 yo you can have with 14 yo, if you are 20 yo you can have with 15 yo and if you are 21 yo you can have with 16 yo. aif you are 22 you can have with 17 yo. I got 60 % warning for suggesting that flr youngcels despite pedocels (old ass niggas wanting girls of such ages or below) post things like "foids peak their prime at 12".

In US starts at 14 with age gaps of 3 years at most. So if 18 yo can have with a 15 yo. If you are 19 yo you can have with 16 yo. If you are 20 yo you can have with 17 yo.

In Brazil AOC is limitless for 14 yo or above. Age gaps only apply to 12 yo and 13 yo. So you must be 17 yo to have a relationship with a 12 yo or you must be 18 yo to have a relationship with a 13 yo.

If you lost your prime years playing vidya is your fault honey. No way to be bluepilled after HS. :feelsdevil:

There should be no age gaps permitted and AoC set a hard limit at 14 maximum.

So basically Brazil without close-in-age exceptions.
 
Last edited:
All you’re gonna do is let 20yo chad shamelessly date 13 year old foids
20 year old chad can get almost any 20 year old woman he wants, why would he have to go for 13 year olds?
 
20 year old chad can get almost any 20 year old woman he wants, why would he have to go for 13 year olds?
How old are you?
 
They date chads their age who I’m extremely jealous of. That’s why i want teen love to be illegal
No such thing as 13 year old chad, all guys are baby faced at 13, I remember being 13/14 and even the ugliest guys were taking virginities of girls, which is why the teen love pill is so brutal, the only chance incels had to get a gf was early teen years and we blew it
 
This, combined with increasing (NOT lowering) AoC would benefit many incels.

It really would if you just use some IQ to think about it
 
I saw you quoting an agecucks reply earlier and now this? lol
I don’t remember what you’re talking about, probably hit the wrong button or something, do you remember what it said?
 
Something like "people who touch children should be killed"
Probably meant to type some reply but hit the send trying to hit an emoji
 
I don't believe in consent. They should simply be punished for thottery.
 

Similar threads

Bone Tomahawk
Replies
18
Views
474
lifeisfucked215
lifeisfucked215
Grotesque Deformity
Replies
21
Views
734
gummybearcel
gummybearcel
D
Replies
68
Views
3K
SteelCentaur
SteelCentaur
J
Replies
26
Views
995
failednormie_
failednormie_

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top