Support the Guide on Patron!

Be sure to share your comments in the Class Participation section below -- that's the best part! Also, you can use the arrows on your keyboard to flip through pages quickly.

Use this link to buy the books, and a portion of the proceeds goes to St. Jude Children's Research Hospital

Join the conversation! There are now 3 comments on this chapter's page 52. Strict Liability: Changing the Rules. What are your thoughts?
  1. WJS says

    Aren’t laws usually supposed to make at least a little bit of sense? Because if it wasn’t meant to punish the men, why was the punishment applied to the men? Wha?

    • It was meant to punish the men. Its just that the reasoning for punishing the men was that the daughter was the father’s property and laying her without his permission was vandalism. But this was after the 13th amendment was ratified, which rendered human property unconstitutional. So they couldn’t actually say that.

    • Punishing men was the means, not the end. The point wasn’t to punish men, it was to protect girls by punishing men.

Class Participation

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Support the Guide on Patron!