new

Nathan Larson #fundie larsonfordelegate.com

(Nathan Larson is a candidate for Virginia state delegate who previously made waves for his stances in favor of legalizing pedophilia, incest and child porn. He has since drastically updated his campaign website and focus. His new signature issue is making assisted suicide available to all, including moody teenagers).

What effect would legalizing pentobarbital for suicide have on rates of recreational use?

If the pentobarbital were to be administered by a suicide clinic, this would likely be a non-issue, since they would only be administering lethal doses.

But even if it were made available over-the-counter, I don't think there would be much effect. After cannabis is legalized, drug users will probably mostly switch to cannabis. Also, most drug users are probably aware that pentobarbital is a dangerous drug best reserved for suicide.

But supposing some recreational users did get hold of it, and overdose on it, this could help weed out of the population those who might have a tendency toward drug abuse, so in the end, it's a net positive.

How much demand will there be for assisted suicide clinics?

I'm thinking the demand could be pretty high, especially among students. According to the CDC, among students in grades 9-12 in the U.S. during 2013:

17.0% of students seriously considered attempting suicide in the previous 12 months (22.4% of females and 11.6% of males).

13.6% of students made a plan about how they would attempt suicide in the previous 12 months (16.9% of females and 10.3% of males).

8.0% of students attempted suicide one or more times in the previous 12 months (10.6% of females and 5.4% of males).

2.7% of students made a suicide attempt that resulted in an injury, poisoning, or an overdose that required medical attention (3.6% of females and 1.8% of males).

That is a lot of people who could potentially benefit from this reform.

Nathan Larson #fundie larsonfordelegate.com

Legalization of marital rape sends an important message, which is that frigidity is not a behavior that a husband need tolerate from his wife. The point is not that he should actually rape her, but that he has a right to if he wants to, since she is his property, given (or sold) to him by her father. This can help instill a proper attitude of submission, which will ultimately benefit her, since women like to be dominated. Not only that, but women will probably have an easier time getting men to want to marry them if they say, "Look honey, once we get married, you won't have to worry that I'll deny you sex, because you can just rape me whenever you want, and the law will allow it."

Men want to own women. But this isn't bad for women, because good men tend to feel a strong sense of moral obligation toward their wives. A typical man, especially after he has had kids with his wife, will not want to divorce her, even if she is refusing sex after she promised she wouldn't do that.

So the typical feminist argument, "If she's not having sex with you, you can just divorce her," falls flat. Feminists who say that are putting themselves in men's shoes and thinking of what they would do if their needs weren't being met in a marriage, but men's sense of love and loyalty is typically less opportunistic than women's and their integrity is more to principles than to feelings. He will generally feel duty-bound to stay, even if he has other options. These days, men are realizing that marriage imposes obligations on them without offering them much in the way of benefits, so they are opting not to marry, with the result being that now there are bastard children running around everywhere.

One hypothesis (mentioned in A Natural History of Rape) for why rape evolved as a method of mating is that it helps ensure that women only reproduce with the strongest men, i.e. those who are capable of raping them. Therefore, women have been biologically programmed to sometimes often token resistance to sex (much like a shit test) as a way of seeing whether the man is strong enough to persist. If the man fails or is deterred by her cries of "No," "Stop," etc., this of course leads to her feeling frustrated at the man's weakness, and she then craves a real man who will dominate her the way she wants and expects. Rape is flattering to women, because it tells them that there is a man who wants her badly enough to force himself upon her if need be.

To quote Illimitable Men Maxim #122, "Women loathe being sexual objectified by lesser men, crafting their disgust for the unworthy into a veneer of moral superiority. Yet hidden within this guise of upright disgust is a depraved desire to be objectified by powerful men. Weak men get nothing, powerful men get perversions." Or as Sanchit Garg writes:

Even if we criminalize rapes, unlike normal criminal cases, marital rapes will be the most difficult cases to prove the alleged charges. It will be the word of the wife against the word of the husband. Naturally, there will be no eye witnesses or even medical proof of the same. The factum of sex between the two can never be denied, the semen samples or the pubic hair or the factum of any other medico-legal evidence can be naturally inferred to. Even, if the wife pleads injury to her private parts, the defence can attribute it to a wild intimate night.
In my opinion, the prosecution of marital rapes will be the most difficult of cases to prove and most of them will end in an acquittal. The prospects of Marital Rapes being used as a sword by disgruntled wives are also quite likely happen.

Rape legalization could even lead to better sex, as being raped provokes an emotional response in women, causing chemicals to flow that produce arousal and, ultimately, orgasm (which could explain the popularity of rape fantasy fiction such as Fifty Shades of Grey). It has been noted, "First of all, orgasms in women being raped are not frequent, but they are not uncommon either. In the study you cite, about 5% to 21% of women interviewed in the studies surveyed reported having an orgasm when they were raped. Researchers have hypothesized that the actual figure is probably a bit higher in reality due to victims being understandably embarrassed both by the rape and by having achieved an orgasm during unwanted, forced sexual relations. Around 20% seems to be a likely, real-word figure."

This is unsurprising, since it has often been noted that the use of male strength in the bedroom can give women vaginal tingles.[1] Tingles generally tend to be caused when a man behaves in a way that shows masculinity and causes a woman to feel a range of emotions. A woman's experience of being raped by her husband might meet that description. It's certainly unlikely to be boring.

As we all know, a young woman will often prefer to open her legs to an exciting badboy rather than a boring niceguy. Women will even watch horror films because they love to feel the roller coaster of emotions of fear, relief, surprise, etc. Novels like The Fountainhead feature heroines who deliberately put themselves in situations that invite rape, and then at the moment when it's about to happen, they hope desperately that the man won't weaken and ask permission. Tuthmosis Sonofra notes, with regard to his pickups, "I'm shocked at how consistently girls will comment on the 'danger' of going home 'with a stranger.' It's like they're reading from a script. I had, literally, three girls over the course of the past 10 days say the same, identical shit. Of course, girls love 'dangerous situations' so play on that."

Nathan Larson #fundie larsonfordelegate.com

In addition, as I noted in my statement with regard to keeping abortion legal, we need to rely somewhat on natural selection to get rid of parental characteristics that would tend to drive them to destroy their own offspring. The state should not forcibly interfere with that natural weeding-out process. As Murray Rothbard pointed out, the state should not even criminalize child neglect, since the child has no rightful claim to the parent's resources.

Nathan Larson #fundie larsonfordelegate.com

I strongly suspect that if incestuous marriage had been legal and socially accepted, Ivanka would be the de jure, rather than merely de facto, First Lady.

Legalization of incestuous marriage (by completely repealing Code of Virginia § 20-38.1) will benefit families by expanding the pool of available mates to include those within the family itself. One difficulty that sometimes arises with finding a suitable mate is information asymmetry, in which one does not know enough about potential mates to make a good decision. In familial relationships, they mate tends to be more of a known quantity.

A commonly-cited disadvantage of incest is the potential for birth defects in their offspring, but this is usually not a major problem if the two are genetically distant enough (e.g. father and daughter as opposed to brother and sister). The major problem arises if inbreeding is carried on for too many generations.

In the manosphere, it is sometimes said that young women desire a father figure (even to the point of looking for a man who will spank them and/or have them call him "daddy"), and that because of sexual differences in emotional attachment, the only truly sacrificial love that a man can expect from a woman is from his mother. It also seems logical that a parent might feel some attraction for a child who resembles the person they fell in love with and had children with. The potential to have incestuous relationships down the road could provide an incentive to produce offspring and to care for them as an investment in one's own sexual future.

A father will tend to be significantly older than his daughter, and therefore will be more likely to be a better provider, and less likely to beat her, than a man her own age.

As always, we can rely on natural selection to ensure that people have no greater tendency toward incest (or any other activity) than would be optimal.

Nathan Larson #fundie larsonfordelegate.com

Whitney Cummings once said, "Porn isn't bad. Men watching porn is like women watching The Food Network: we're both watching things we're never going to freaking do." Feminists led the efforts to ban child pornography in the late 1970s, and will continue trying to demonize men for indulging their curiosity in, or getting aroused by, "deviant" forms of sexuality, and for exploiting women, even as women (especially feminist women, who often are excited by rape fantasies — not that there's anything wrong with that) indulge in their own violent, sadomasochistic pornography by reading Fifty Shades of Grey. It's hypocritical and a double standard.

Feminists have even gotten porn involving 17-year-old girls declared "child pornography," despite the fact that these girls would, until very recently, have been considered nubile (i.e. of marriageable age), rather than children. It is just another way of shaming men for having normal sexual desires. Young women are at the peak of their fertile years, so it is natural for men to want to have sex with them, and understandable that some men would resort to pornography as a more easily obtainable substitute.

In a way, it shouldn't be all that surprising that some men want to have sex even with girls who haven't reached puberty. There are, after all, men who will have sex with women (e.g. the wife they've been married to for 30 years) who are so old as to be infertile, so why wouldn't there be men who would have sex with girls who are too young to be fertile? It's been theorized that sex serves a number of purposes besides reproduction (for example, giving couples another reason to stay together to raise their children). It doesn't seem all that farfetched that, in the race among men to be the first to get the youngest and freshest girls as they come on the market, some men would end up going so far as to go for prepubescent girls, erring on the side of too young rather than too old.

There's also Rule 34, "If it exists, there's porn of it"; for whatever reason, the human mind seems to have a limitless ability to fetishize anything. "Normal" people download videos of bukkake and Roman showers, yet somehow child porn is deviant? These distinctions are political, not scientific. As Darian Meacham's Medicine and Society, New Perspectives in Continental Philosophy notes, "Immediately after the APA board's decision to delete homosexuality from their manual, Irving Bieber publicly asked Spitzer whether he would consider deleting other sexual deviations from DSM, too. Spitzer answered: 'I haven't given much thought to [these problems] and perhaps that is because the voyeurs and the fetishists have not yet organized themselves and forced us to do that'."

It also shouldn't be too surprising that some men are attracted to young boys. According to the Super Gay Uncles Theory, one reason for homosexuality's existence might be so that there are extra men around to provide nurturance to children in their extended families. Wouldn't pedophilic desires for boys tend to create an incentive to provide even more nurturance, as a form of child grooming (which some pederasts have likened to heterosexual dating, in which the wealthier older man pays for the dates)? This is the basic thrust of the classic essay, The Descent of Chester.