it was. that's the common law definition. if not, tell me what it was.
But we had this conversation weeks ago... surely you remember it?
For reference, it was the one where a woman could be raped even if she didn't fight back, and where a man could be a rape victim.
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=rape
let's knock these off
1. lack of anybody but select few being able to vote - great and the way it should always be. the fact that my vote and yours are worth the same is sick.
You wouldn't get a vote either... do remember that.
2. promiscuous men and women getting it in the neck - what i'm saying should happen to these monsters
So, you're now saying that MEN should stay chaste until marriage... that is a contradiction to what you were saying a couple of weeks back. So, no... it's not what you've been saying at all.
3. with there being no such thing as a gender role in anything except said select few - you idiot ! you think women could have worked all the jobs men could, like stone masonry, or that men could have given birth?
Actually, yes... women did do the same jobs... pre-industrialisation everything had to be done by hand. None of this one person able to do the work of several because they have this handy machine doing it. Everyone, including small kids, worked at the same damned jobs.
And please, learn the difference between a Gender role and a Biological role... they are not the same thing.
4. and there being no concept of a "provider" for a stay-at-home mum who's raiding the kids -and who provided for her? that social security program from 1456
Both parents... the problem for you is there was no such concept as a Stay at home mum, because both parents worked the fucking fields all day long. Those living in towns? Worked their fucking fingers to the bone in very heavy manual labour... the concept of a woman staying at home and just raising the kids while hubby went out to work? It didn't exist pre-1800's.
You are an historian, right? Then you should already know this... but since you seem to be trying to deny it, I can only assume that you've lied about being an historian... among with all the other shit you keep on lying about.
i have to give it to you. out of all of these lunatics here you're the craziest. fuck off, old man. i am no longer replying to your insane dot sprinkled posts
When you need to insist that reality is insane and doesn't exist, that should be a big clue that you've not got a firm grasp on what is real...
I've got some questions for our resident
@Holden...
1) Why are you still here?
Because someone on the interwebz is wrong and he's got to make sure they admit they are wrong!!
2) Why are you still doing this?
See above...
3) Why can't you take good advice offered to you when it is?
How can it be good advice when it's wrong?!?
4) Why can't you wake up and see these problems are your fault because of your issues?
Because you're wrong!!!
5) Why... Just why do you keep dodging the truths about you?
They cannot be truths because everyone is wrong except him!!!
What do you think, accurate enough?