1. Check this out on the feminists, at least those in India responsible for this horrid video. There has been a spate of horrendous rapes in this country. Do the feminists there come out against rape? Well, of course, some of them do, quite properly, as rape is a per se violation of the libertarian non aggression principle (NAP). But, many of them also oppose “leering”: http://ca.shine.yahoo.com/blogs/shine-on/indian-ad-shows-absurdity-leering-men-212739529.html. The title of this 90 second video is: “Indian ad shows the absurdity of leering men.” At best, this video just muddies the waters; it takes time, effort, treasure, away from the only proper task, the elimination of rape. At worst, it implies that leering violates the NAP, and should be proscribed by law. But leering is just looking. People have a right to look at whatever they want. “He is looking at me,” when true, is not a rights violation. In any case, it is a perfectly legitimate action, on the part of both sexes, to look at each other. How, else, is the next generation to arise, if everyone has to keep his (or her) eyes to himself? I don’t know what are the Indian laws about packing heat, but if they were serious about stopping rape, women in that benighted country would arm themselves. They should all read John Lott, our point man on this important issue. See this book of his: More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control. I have also written a bit about this: http://www.lewrockwell.com/block/block10.html; http://mises.org/Community/forums/p/5192/69550.aspx#69550; http://www.lewrockwell.com/block/block10.html; http://www.free-market.net/rd/997213159.html.
2. What about the homosexuals? When the gays rioted at Stonewall in New York City (http://manhattan.about.com/od/glbtscene/a/stonewallriots.htm) they were acting compatibly with the NAP of libertarianism. The cops (pigs, they were called in those days) were jailing homosexuals merely for consenting adult behavior. This was a violation of the NAP. But, nowadays, many gays do not limit themselves to upholding their (and by extension, everyone else’s) rights. Now, of late, many in the homosexual community have been insisting that other people, who do not appreciate their lifestyle, and who wish to have nothing to do with them, be forced, against their will, to engage in commercial activities with them. See this, for example: Block, Walter E. 2013. “New Mexico Photographer Discriminates Against Lesbians: Liberals Zero, Conservatives One, Libertarians Full Marks.” September 13; http://www.lewrockwell.com/?post_type=article&p=453653&preview=true
In my assessment, the majority of gays have gone from a group defending the NAP to one attacking it. For shame! This applies in particular to the people posing as figure heads of this community who are heralding these court decisions as victories, and to all those who support them in this. Certainly, I would not condemn on these or any other grounds all homosexuals or feminists. There are many homosexuals and feminists who are staunch libertarians. I thank Allison Oldak for editorial assistance on this blog.