Male taxpayers are literally rape survivors.

As always, we should begin by defining our terms. What is rape, and why is it bad?

There is nothing inherently traumatic about a foreign object being inserted in the vagina. Women insert tampons several times a month. Moreover, a large majority of rapes are not forceful, so the concept of rape is not related to physical pain or mere penetration. Rapes can even occur without the victim being aware of it. Yet, rape is punished as severely as aggravated assault, such as breaking someone’s legs. Why is that?

We punish rape for psychological reasons. Women who experience rape experience a loss of perceived autonomy over their reproductive outcomes. Our instincts have changed little since our hunter/gatherer times, so we often experience vestigial feelings originating from our past as tribesmen and tribeswomen. A woman inseminated by a man she did not choose prevents her from passing on the best quality genes. That is unless the man is more attractive than her, of course.

From an evolutionary perspective, being impregnated by a low quality male can be devastating. From any perspective actually.

Women are particularly vulnerable to rape because mating with the wrong person is extremely costly. They can only have a child every few years. Mating with a man of suboptimal market value is especially damaging for women, because their primary mating strategy is focusing on the quality, not the number of offspring.

As a result of differential mating strategies in men and women, the rape of men will not be defined by penetration. Instead, rape is hereby defined based on the justification of its severe punishment, and of its distal evolutionary meaning. Rape is the action that leads to the perception of losing autonomy over one’s reproductive outcomes. 

Rape is primarily punishable because of potential psychological hazards.

What about men?

Unlike women, men’s reproductive strategies are primarily oriented towards the number, rather than quality, of mating opportunities. The universal determinant of reproductive outcomes for men is social status, usually estimated by a man’s financial resources (source). Hence, men are raped, or are denied autonomy over their reproductive outcomes, when their ability to reach a high status is impeded.

As a matter of fact, men have a strong physiological reaction to a perceived loss of status, such as an acute drop in testosterone levels (source), elevation of cortisol levels, and a heightened heart rate reactivity (source). Importantly, this pattern is only seen in men (source). In essence, men also experience vestigial neuroendocrine reactions to evolution-related challenges.

A loss of status evokes a strong physiological reaction in men.

In modern times, one’s status is defined by money. A man needs money to provide for his children. Money is therefore the determinant of status in Western society. Charisma and assertiveness may contribute to reaching a high status, but these alone won’t suffice to have a roof, let alone to start a business.

What does this mean? When money is taken away from men, they feel demoted. Their status is lowered. Their opportunities are restricted, and their market value decreases. By taxation, men are being raped because they are losing autonomy over their reproductive outcomes.

In conclusion, by taking a chunk of men’s market value, the government rapes men. Men’s reproductive success is ultimately dependent on their ability to provide resources for women and children. Sadly, taxation heavily impedes men’s ability to do so.

”Open up! Other people need the things you have earned.”

Why is the government transgressing men’s reproductive integrity? A woman has no obligation to share her market value with the public, so why is everyone entitled to men’s reproductive worth? Why is it only men that need to share their assets for social harmony? Men who have few sexual partners are commonly depressed (source), which can transform them into serial killers (source). Why won’t politicians acknowledge this?

That being said, I’m not necessarily against taxation, but only if prostitution is free!

”Listen Daisy. I don’t think I’m going to pay rent this month. I have a headache.”

2 thoughts on “Male taxpayers are literally rape survivors.

  1. No this is about women thinking their sexual value has been reduced by rape. Thinking that the ultimate crime has been committed because the value of her golden pussy has been sullied, a valued commodity worth the entire productive life of any man.


  2. A quibble. Since men compete, if all men are taxed in such a way as to keep their relative positions the same, then there is no change to their relative competitive rankings vis-a-vis other men. Clearly, this is not the case. Instead, taxes are “progressive”, lowering the positions of (actually) higher status males and raising the positions of (actually) lower status males. But, as you point out in another post, since taxation is used to support women via the state as a substitute for men, this siphoning of support lowers the actual status of all men.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s