Ginsburg and Feigen-Fasteau recommend a revision of 18 U.S.C. §2032 from “carnal knowledge of any female, not his wife who has not attained the age of sixteen years” to “A person is guilty of an offense if he engages in a sexual act with another person, not his spouse, and . . . the other person is, in fact, less than 12 years old."
Refer to the 2nd PDF reference below that she co-authored that I have commented on here below.
Anyways, here's my process:
Do a search for: "ruth bader ginsburg" consent. Replace with whomever or whatever is "controversial" as needed.
If the entire first page of results are "fact check," assume the worst. In this case, not only do I get fact checks about that but many other similar topics! So what is it she actually said?
Let's use Snopes and their reference publication the EPPC.
Snopes thought claiming this false would be best done by using a tame women's status publication instead of a R rating worthy age of consent publication. You can't shine a light on this whole problem, including shady fact checkers, if you're not extremely prepared and now you are with strawman publication in hand!
Despite being indecent, it is directly reputable because it provides direct full references that you can verify yourself and make the same points even without the article.
TLDR So yes, she did argue for a change to the age of consent to "under 12," the legalization of immoral trafficking, and many other controversial things (like legalization of prostitution for women as it should be their Right) in the name of classical feminism.
Personally, I feel what she wrote is worse than age of consent, because it is argued for together not for equality or even the equity of women, but promoting the already powerful traffickers and pimps. Could you imagine them working together, legally?!
Yes.
Refer to the 2nd PDF reference below that she co-authored that I have commented on here below.
Anyways, here's my process:
Let's use Snopes and their reference publication the EPPC.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-ruth-bader-ginsburg-say-that-pedophilia-was-good-for-children/ which is blocked by archive.org.
https://eppc.org/publications/excerpts-from-the-legal-status-of-women-under-federal-law/ or https://web.archive.org/web/20140828184629/http://eppc.org/publications/excerpts-from-the-legal-status-of-women-under-federal-law/
Snopes thought claiming this false would be best done by using a tame women's status publication instead of a R rating worthy age of consent publication. You can't shine a light on this whole problem, including shady fact checkers, if you're not extremely prepared and now you are with strawman publication in hand!
So let's take a look at the publication of focus.
The University of Maryland scrubbed this, however here's a (eyebrow raise for the name) mirror: https://scouting4boysorg.files.wordpress.com/2019/01/us-commission-on-civil-rights-sex-bias-in-the-us-code-1977.pdf (scouting4boys is an activist organization that promotes that Boy Scouts should be for boys, not something else) Congrats! You're prepared!
Good luck finding a "decent" fact checker that references this one! We'll use an "indecent" one just for the gist. https://nworeport.me/2018/01/30/supreme-court-justice-ginsburg-favors-decriminalizing-pedophilia-and-child-sex-trafficking/ or https://web.archive.org/web/20180926070807/https://nworeport.me/2018/01/30/supreme-court-justice-ginsburg-favors-decriminalizing-pedophilia-and-child-sex-trafficking/
Despite being indecent, it is directly reputable because it provides direct full references that you can verify yourself and make the same points even without the article.
TLDR So yes, she did argue for a change to the age of consent to "under 12," the legalization of immoral trafficking, and many other controversial things (like legalization of prostitution for women as it should be their Right) in the name of classical feminism.
Personally, I feel what she wrote is worse than age of consent, because it is argued for together not for equality or even the equity of women, but promoting the already powerful traffickers and pimps. Could you imagine them working together, legally?!
rBg
Ya that