Didn’t you know, Chuck, that only men can be (effectively) guilty of paedophilia/underage sex?
Much Like Queen Victoria viewed it impossible for women to be homosexual, and therefore the laws only reflected guilt in cases of male homosexual acts.

As you imply; if it was a 41 year old male with a 14 yo girl, it would be sex with a minor, and no question about jail time. Reverse the roles, though, and it’s just a boy being a boy with an older woman. One can almost sense sympathy for the woman, not the boy, with the woman being described as “drunk and vulnerable”.

More duality in the legal system; one law for men, another for women.
This really pisses me off too.

Sex accused woman ‘drunk and vulnerable

A 41-year-old woman was drunk and vulnerable when she had sex with a 14-year-old boy during a drinking binge, a court has heard.

…

During the pre-sentence hearing, the crown submitted that a suspended jail term is within the range of an appropriate penalty.

The maximum penalty for the offence of sexually penetrating a child under 16 is 10 years jail.

Judge Howard Mason will sentence Mitchell next month.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/australia/3012723/Sex-accused-woman-drunk-and-vulnerable

Sad to see the blogger buying into this bogus “index” and its implied leftwing pandering to feminist/socialist wealth-redistribution interests, which is all this nonsense adds up to in the end. There is no conspiracy against women to pay them 76 cents in the dollar. There is no conspiracy to keep them out of political power. Obviously it would seem that way to up-and-coming narcissists like Helen Clark, who as the biggest narcissist merely represented the biggest threat to her fellow narcissists-in-power whether male or female.

No, no. The only conspiracy is on the part of political self-promoters, for example these Swedish idiots who shut out obviously better male politicians to satisfy a minimum 40% quota of female MPs. What transparent evil and stupidity. Or the continued feminist propaganda victimising women by making them believe they are victim-when they are not-such as the 76% myth. The leftwing Grand Unified Theory: perceived victim + supposed oppressor=political power.

In IT female techies are in very short supply. Less than 10% I would say.

There are plenty of men who agree on many issues you raise but I doubt if many support your extreme views particularly your comments regarding the sick individual who murdered Sophie Elliot. Such comments as yours do nothing to help non misogynist men and father correct injustices in the Family Court.

BTW – Peter lies and personally attacks reflect more on you than the person you are attacking.

“Chuck Bird, by the way, is a scrawny North American who is so obsessed by homosexuality that he addressed a meeting of “Gays” in an attempt to get them to become Christians and scrawny like him.”

For a start I am not a Christian so that put a lie to your baseless lie.

While on the topic of obsession why not tell us all what some woman or women did to you to make you such a bitter and twisted misogynist.

Gender equality will only be achieved when the last male is emasculated.

There’s only two of us left … and I’m not sure about you, Brian.

There he would learn that, if you want to compare men and women, you need to go beyond what the Feminists want you to look at. You need to look at the issues listed in Men’s Manifestoes such as at http://equality.netfirms.com/manifest.html

E.g. Life expectancy, conscription, abortion rights (choice for men), custody rights, health funding, domestic violence protection, false accusation protection, equality in justice outcomes, etc., etc..

A classic example of the difference between equal outcome and equal opportunity is the teaching and nursing statistics. Men are under-represented in these careers but that is a case of a lower percentage of men wanting to be in these careers… and their is nothing wrong with that.

Another example is the percentage of women in senior management roles, this is because of a lower percentage of women wishing to work in these roles and take on the extra work, stress, and hours these roles require.

It is ironic that a big impediment to what the socialists desire is the laws they create. EG, paid maternity leave and the requirement to keep the job open. Most employers would choose employing a male over a female if all other merits were equal as the male is very very very unlikely to require maternity leave, whereas a female could spring this on at any time. This becomes increasingly obvious in vital roles where replacements are difficult to find and train.

The statistics show a high percentage of female “technical workers”. I don’t see many women engineers or computer programmers, so there must be heaps of nurses and “dreadful” accountants.

Makes me wonder about the rest of their figures; I’m with Buggerlugs on this one.

[DPF: If you read the report you would see the two are closely linked.]