From Mises Wiki, the global repository of classical-liberal thought
Jump to: navigation, search

Rape is a form of sexual assault involving sexual penetration. In recent years, the word “rape” has been greatly misused to refer to forms of consensual sex of which mainstream society does not approve. Hence terms such as “statutory rape” which can refer to sex that both parties wanted and perhaps even enjoyed. The Case for Discrimination notes, "For those of us who think that the democratic principle of majority rule establishes the morality of government actions, I would caution that gang rape is no more morally acceptable than individual rape. In other words, a majority vote to rape someone does not make rape moral. . . . Widespread government ownership and/or control over property is consistent with rape-maximization. Government is the major source of rape-like exchanges."[1]

Rapists have been compared to cannabis smokers; Rep. Mark Souder objected to discussing pot legalization on the grounds that “We don’t debate the pros and cons of rape or child abuse.”[2] In the government’s eyes, a drug crime can sometimes be worse than a sex offense.

John Trenchard writes, "It is more safe, as well as virtuous, to accept the willing and chaste embraces of conjugal affection, than by violence to extort forbidden and dangerous pleasures, and which for the most part, if not always, fail our expectations."[3]

Benjamin Marks argues that government schools are similar to child molestation: "[I]s sex not necessary and for the good of society? Why doesn’t government interfere in sexual relations as it does in educational relations? The application of the equivalent interference in sexual relations as government currently performs in educational relations is called rape." John Zube similarly writes, "It is something like rape, in education, when one is forced to learn something one does not want to learn, from someone one does not like, at a place and time not of one’s choosing".[4]

According to The Market for Liberty, "A rapist who attacked and beat a woman would be responsible not only for paying medical bills for all injuries he had caused her and reparations for time she might lose from work, but he would also owe his victim compensation for her pain and suffering, both mental and physical. Besides all debts owed to the primary victim, the aggressor might also owe secondary reparations to others who had suffered indirectly because of his actions (for example, the victim's family."[5]


  1. Block, Walter. "Feminism, Sex Differences, and Sex Discrimination". The Case for Discrimination. pp. 283. 
  2. "Supporters of Drug Policy Reform Should Be Considered for RICO Prosecutions; Compared to Pedophiles and Rapists at House Hearing". National Drug Strategy Network. Summer 1999. 
  3. "Cato's Letter No. 87: Gold and Silver in a Country to be considered only as Commodities". 1722. 
  4. Marks, Benjamin (Spring 2005). "Archipelagos of Educational Chaos". Journal of Libertarian Studies 19 (2): 98. 
  5. Tannehill, Morris and Linda (March 1970). "Dealing with Coercion". The Market for Liberty. pp. 95.