While rape (now known as the crime of forced sexual intercourse, etc.) is a crime because it involves violence—which makes sense—the idea that non-consensual sexual intercourse is a crime likely stems from Professor Ida (a resident of Japan), who has studied the Penal Code too intensively and holds the view that “sexual intercourse itself is illegal.”
It is a reckless argument that fails to link with the Civil Code. It is also unreasonable to use the same term “non-consensual” for non-consensual sexual intercourse—which involves another person—and for non-consensual abortion, which is a decision made by the mother. Furthermore, one could always claim after the fact that there was no consent. Without my own clarification—that consent should be based on consensual intercourse involving a mental entity refined by the Yamato Institution or the female body—I must say this is a truly terrible law.
The Penal Code uniformly prohibits lewd acts with persons under 13 years of age (which should be interpreted as also prohibiting such acts between persons under 13), and prohibits sexual intercourse with persons under 16 years of age (which should be interpreted as also prohibiting such acts between persons under 16). and the Ordinance on the Sound Development of Youth uniformly prohibits sexual intercourse or acts analogous to sexual intercourse with persons under 18 (which should be interpreted as also prohibiting such acts between persons under 18). So, in the end, does this mean that aside from romantic relationships between adults, only elementary school students’ “lucky pervy” encounters and college students’ instant, no-strings-attached flings are legal? That’s an impossible game.
It is clear that the efficacy of the “principle of legitimacy whereby the homosocial order acquires female bodies”—a function of the male-line imperial system—had been lost. The incident in which the imperial princesses, who should have played a role in balancing the political pressure that subordinates women to male-dominated society, instead advocated for the male-line imperial system was entirely wrong. However, only my—Reo Toyama’s—theoretical refinement stands as a unique skill, asserting supremacy under the canopy of doom. it is reasonable to consider that the civil and criminal statutes of limitations of the imperial system have been lifted within the thought experiments of Toyama’s academic theory (subject to reversal if refuted).
Every field where politics exists—as a political space generated by the three wars established in world politics—will draw young people aged 13 to 18, who are in their prime for romance, into Toyama’s theoretical thought experiment.
Romantic relationships and investment strategies are a matter of personal responsibility; freedom prevails where political responsibility is assumed. Voter education is entering its 25th year.