Meet Rep. Larry Lockman: Maine Republican Asks Why Women Should Be Able To Get Abortions But Men Not Be Able To Rape Them

Lockman2012Republicans and rape comments appear to have an almost cyclic regularity with election periods. If you recall, the Republicans were in a strong position last elections when candidates started making bizarre and at times creepy comments — alienating voters and tipping the balance in the Senate.
Now, Republican Maine state Representative Lawrence Lockman appears to have lined up early in the rape theme line (as early as 1995) in addition to extreme statements regarding abortion and homosexuality is under fire for comments he’s made in the media regarding rape, abortion, and homosexuality.

An activist uncovered a press statement in 1995 in which Lockman reportedly says “If a woman has (the right to an abortion), why shouldn’t a man be free to use his superior strength to force himself on a woman? At least the rapist’s pursuit of sexual freedom doesn’t (in most cases) result in anyone’s death.” What is most remarkable about this statement — other than the statement itself — is that I find it virtually incomprehensible beyond treating rape as a casual analogy. Moreover, it is reported that this was in an actual press statement not some comment at a bar or unguarded email. He likewise said in a letter to Bangor News that “Clearly the practice of sodomy is learned behavior, and those addicted to this form of biologically-insane sex are at high risk for all manner of serious medical problems.”

He is also accused of once suggesting that the HIV virus can be spread through mosquitoes and bed sheets. He opposed HIV infected students attending school by saying “It’s peculiar that the government is telling health care workers that surfaces contaminated with bodily fluids should be thoroughly disinfected, but at the same time they are telling us that toilet seats have some magical property that they are able to resist viruses.” Lockman also reportedly asserted that liberals made AIDS epidemic worse by assuring “the public that the practice of sodomy is a legitimate alternative lifestyle, rather than a perverted and depraved crime against humanity.” He once warned that there could be a quota system on the way to require gays and lesbians in every workplace: “You can bet the rent money they will demand that employers set up goals and timetables to achieve 10 percent homosexual representation in the workforce and in government contracts.”

Lockman responded to the criticism by saying “I have always been passionate about my beliefs, and years ago I said things that I regret. I hold no animosity toward anyone by virtue of their gender or sexual orientation.” As long, presumably, that they do not use the toilets or engage in homosexual relations.

In his official bio, it states that

Lockman studied liberal arts at Covenant College in Lookout Mountain, Georgia and Pasadena City College in Pasadena, California. He is a 1967 graduate of Philmont Christian Academy in Jenkintown, Pa.

He works as a Territory Manager in eastern and central Maine for National Write Your Congressman (, a non-partisan legislative research organization with members in all 50 states.

From 1992 to 2010, Lockman worked as a Territory Manager in eastern Maine for the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), and qualified numerous times for NFIB’s prestigious President’s Club, as well as the biennial Small Business Summit in Washington, DC. Prior to his tenure at NFIB, Lockman was employed for 16 years at Diamond Occidental’s lumber mill in Passadumkeag.

However, he does say that he “regrets” the bit about rape.

121 thoughts on “Meet Rep. Larry Lockman: Maine Republican Asks Why Women Should Be Able To Get Abortions But Men Not Be Able To Rape Them”

  1. Why should women not be allowed to beat your brains in, with baseball bats?

  2. Paul C. Schulte

    Dredd – females are being given special privileges in rape charges. Can you disprove that?
    Willy talked about his comments that got him thrown out of a newspaper column.

    He noted that the problem he wrote about is that Universities were using a preponderance of evidence standard, but courts use beyond a reasonable doubt.


    In a court case where a woman sues a man for sexual assault, a civil case, the burden of proof is on the woman and the degree of the burden is preponderance of evidence.

    Only in a criminal case brought by the government is the burden beyond a reasonable doubt.

    1. Dredd – the Dept of Education is forcing new standards of evidence on rape cases and sexual harassment cases at universities. It puts all males at risk. Males are not allowed to fight back in a fair manner. Have you read the new criteria put forward by the government?

  3. zarathustra, you have had a comment deleted under of civility rule for obscenity.

    1. The Lewinski tapes showed that Bill Clinton liked going bareback and had genital herpes.

  4. bettykath:

    Great video. She was charming. I loved her comment about people on the Internet being just awful. So true.

    I’ve always hated it when Hollywood casts non-American Indians as Indians (like in every single Western before the 80s), and able-bodied as handicapped. But hopefully times are changing. I recall that Twilight producers required actors to submit proof of American Indian ancestry to play certain parts.

    1. Karen – it is called acting. If all gay guys in Hollywood had to give up playing straight guys the industry would fold.

  5. Saucy:

    “It’s neither sustainable nor fair to the people who are not protected.”

    We either need to expand the protection class to encompass everyone, or limit it. Should we protect political affiliation, religious affiliation, sports preferences? Beauty?

    Should an eminently qualified journalist who adores Anne Coulter be able to demand to be hired to NPR, and sue if she is not? What about the case where a mom prefers to hire older women as live-in nanny, rather than an extremely attractive young woman? Should they be able to sue?

    We do need to figure out a limit.

  6. HELLO! Can you say Bill Clinton? Hillary was his protective enabler.

    Are you kidding me? On the one hand, amusing anecdotes. On the other, frightening reality. Heeeeere’s Billy:

    “In an interview by Dorothy Rabinowitz for the Wall Street Journal editorial page, Broaddrick claimed that Clinton had told her not to worry about pregnancy, because childhood mumps had rendered him sterile. The alleged incident occurred two years before Clinton’s daughter with his wife Hillary Rodham was born. Clinton made no mention of Broaddrick or the alleged incident in his 2004 memoir My Life.

    In 1984, Broaddrick’s nursing facility was adjudged the best in the state, which brought a congratulatory official letter from the governor. On the bottom was a handwritten note from Clinton, saying, “I admire you very much.”[4] Broaddrick said that Clinton tried to apologize to her in 1991, and claimed he had changed. In response to his apologies, as she told The Washington Post, “I told him to go to hell, and I walked off”.[5]

    Five people have stated that Broaddrick told them about a rape shortly after it allegedly occurred.”

  7. Randyjet:

    I’ve seen it happen before – firing more experienced employees to make room for lower paid less experienced people. Sorry you got caught up in it. It’s a kind of experience/wisdom-drain, in my opinion.

    “I am still in favor of preferential hiring to make up for past discrimination, but ONLY if two candidates have equal qualifications.” As your own experience illustrated, that is unfortunately not how Affirmative Action gets implemented. I have known people who were more qualified get passed over for firemen and police jobs and far less qualified minorities get on. I have heard firemen bitterly complain about lowering standards so women can pass the physical tests. I have had college professors tell me they had to teach the same class to two audiences – the students who got in on their brains, and the ones who were less qualified, who got in on affirmative action. I have met a brilliant black neurosurgeon, who told me that his colleagues (and patients) automatically assume he got to med school on affirmative action, and was therefor, by definition, less qualified. He said AA destroys the reputation of minorities who earned jobs or college admissions on their own merits. Because time after time, it has been well documented that standards get lowered to meet quotas.

    In a more perfect world, gender, age, sexual orientation, and skin color will not matter in college admissions or job interviews. It will be a just procedure where candidates are judged on merit ALONE. If you want more African Americans getting into college, don’t lower standards. Improve our education system so that anyone who applies himself can graduate high school with an excellent education. Offer scholarships. But don’t lower the bar.

  8. No, but the consequences are different hence the differing standards. The reason grand jury standards are so low is that there is no finding except that there is evidence to believe a crime has been committed and that the object of the indictment committed it. It is not a finding of guilt merely probable cause. I have no problem with that process since it is merely the first screen of the process.

    1. mespo – but they are using this standard to kick you out of school and ruin your life.

  9. Paul:

    Will is clearly wrong. There is no favored status for alleged victims. The sexual abuse charge must still be proven by whatever standard is accepted. The issue boils down to whether we must afford all due process protections in a purely civil context over the issue of separation from the university. I am not aware of any court holding that way so colleges are free to adopt systems with the Dept of Education setting the standards. While we might disagree with the standards, courts remain present to review the standards for the basics of fairness and due process (notice, explanation of charges, right to be heard, right to representation, right to confront, etc) and compliance with legislative intent when the issue involves a substantial personal right. The process must be essentially fair but need not have all the safeguards present as in a criminal context where liberty is at stake.

    1. mespo – the standard is as low as for a grand jury. Would you want that standard if you were accused?

  10. Paul:

    ““Combine this with capacious definitions of sexual assault that can include not only forcible sexual penetration but also nonconsensual touching,” Will writes. “Then add the doctrine that the consent of a female who has been drinking might not protect a male from being found guilty of rape. Then comes costly litigation against institutions that have denied due process to males they accuse of what society considers serious felonies.”


    That’s not a conclusion. Those statements are assertions that supports his conclusion:

    “Colleges and universities are being educated by Washington and are finding the experience excruciating. They are learning that when they say campus victimizations are ubiquitous (“micro-aggressions,” often not discernible to the untutored eye, are everywhere), and that when they make victimhood a coveted status that confers privileges, victims proliferate. “

  11. Paul C. Schulte

    Dredd – females are being given special privileges in rape charges. Can you disprove that?
    That is not the exercise.

    The exercise for Willy is to be able to tell the difference between old time baseball and sex.

    Maybe this will put some hills on all that flatness in his roundness between his ears:

  12. From the Onion

    Nation Wondering Why Struggling Mental Health System Can’t Just Pull Itself Together
    ‘Quit Feeling Sorry For Yourself And Make An Effort,’ Citizens Say

    NEWS • Mental Health • Healthcare • News • ISSUE 50•24 • Jun 19, 2014

    Americans say they want the nation’s mental health system to get better, but admit they are fed up with it just languishing in its own misery and doing nothing to help itself.

    WASHINGTON—Saying that things are only going to keep getting worse unless it’s willing to step up and make some changes, millions of frustrated Americans wondered this week why the nation’s struggling mental health system couldn’t just snap out of its funk and pull itself together.

    Citing reports that an estimated 91 million Americans live in areas where shortages of mental health professionals make getting treatment difficult and that the mental health system had lost $4.35 billion in state funding from 2009–2012, exasperated citizens from across the country said they had finally reached their limit with the network of medical professionals, inpatient facilities, and long-term treatment programs that apparently lacked the willpower to improve its situation.

    “Look, I know it’s been a rough couple of years and things haven’t exactly gotten any easier lately, but this can’t go on,” said Oakland, CA resident Marissa Thomas, adding she had lost all patience waiting for the mental health system to stop wallowing in its struggles and make a concerted effort to get its act together. “Eventually, it’s got to want to fix itself.”

    “No one’s going to waltz in one day, wave a magic wand, and make all these troubles disappear,” continued Thomas, who said she was “beyond exhausted” with the mental health system’s inability to accommodate the estimated 600,000 severely mentally ill individuals who annually end up homeless, in prisons, or dead from suicide. “It just keeps having the same issues over and over again and doesn’t do a thing about them. I’m pretty much numb to it at this point.”

    As the nation’s mental health care system continues to sink deeper and deeper into despair, even failing to perform basic tasks such as routine mental health evaluations and emergency counseling services, Americans have reportedly begun to wonder if it has any desire at all to take responsibility for its current state or if it will just continue to burden the people close to it.

    Many also expressed alarm at the struggling system’s potential to cause harm not only to itself but others as well.

    “I honestly don’t feel comfortable being around it anymore,” said Raleigh, NC resident Patrick Leets, noting that the nation’s network of behavior health services only makes things worse by comparing itself to free and universally accessible systems like the United Kingdom’s. “It’s just so unpredictable. Until it finally recognizes what’s best for it and puts in some actual initiative to get back on its feet, I’m keeping my distance.”

    “I mean, Christ, look at the education system—it’s been in terrible shape for years, but it’s doing what it can to make the best of a difficult situation,” he added.

    Sources confirmed that many citizens have found supporting the troubled mental health system a hopeless exercise, saying that it simply needs to decide whether it wants to get well or waste away.

    “To be honest, it’s getting to a point where I feel like I just need to wash my hands clean of the situation,” said Anna Kivolowitz of Salem, OR. “I relied on the mental health care system for years, but now I realize I just can’t do it anymore. If it doesn’t want to take care of itself, there’s no way it’ll be there for me.”

    “But it’s out of my control,” she added. “I’m done dealing with it. I’m just done.”

    At press time, Americans said they were sorry and that they hadn’t meant to come off so harshly because they knew their mental health system didn’t want to be a problem, all the while reportedly resigning themselves to the fact that this was probably as healthy as the system was ever going to be.

  13. mespo727272


    In my mind, Geo Will is an authority on nothing else besides old time baseball.
    Yes, which is like some of the … ummm … “historians” who apologize for him here.

    That is not so much the problem as is the fact that Willy can’t tell the difference between that old time baseball and current human sexuality.

  14. Paul C. Schulte

    mespo – Will’s commentary had to do with the fact that females are given special privileges in colleges and universities in rape charges. Males are not allowed to cross-examine them, have an attorney or take any of what would be considered ordinary legal steps to defend themselves.
    Yo, that is not where rapists are sent to jail from yo.

    This should tell you how absolutely vacuous Will’s brain has become:

    “A syndicated column by Michael Gerson, a former speechwriter for George W. Bush, is replacing Will’s in the Post-Dispatch.”

    (ibid). Yes, Willy is being replaced by the hehaw who wrote the speech on why we should not remember this:

    I’ll bet you didn’t know that June is “torture awareness month” thanks to the fact that, on June 26, 1987, the Convention Against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman, and Degrading Treatment or Punishment went into effect internationally. In this country, however, as a recent Amnesty International survey indicated, Americans are essentially living in Torture Unawareness Month, or perhaps even Torture Approval Month, and not just in June 2014 but every month of the year.

    (The Dogma of The High Priest In Chief – 3).

    And don’t forget the video which The Liberry of Preznit Blush banned:

    1. Dredd – females are being given special privileges in rape charges. Can you disprove that?

  15. Paul:

    We’ve had that debate here before. We can address the merits of administrative tribunals and their burdens of proof and process but this was just some Geo Will grandstanding with shock-value commentary. Victims of sexual assault are not “privileged” for being assaulted. They are victims if the allegations are true. No one suggest a lynch mob to flog the alleged perpetrator but some well considered thought has gone into the appropriate burden of proof in an administrative setting where the rules of criminal court simply do not apply. That cuts both ways for the defense can use things never allowed in courtrooms (lie detectors, prior good acts) and the prosecution can ease the toll of testifying on the victim (barring mention of prior sexual history with third parties for example). It’s a trade-off to be sure but suggesting that sexual assault victims are treated better because of their status flies in the face of what we know about victims and assailants. Administrative proceedings determine only the fitness for staying at the institution not legal guilt or innocence. In my view, the standard should be lower but I would not hinder the right to confront in some fashion.

    1. mespo – this is the meat of Will’s argument.

      “Combine this with capacious definitions of sexual assault that can include not only forcible sexual penetration but also nonconsensual touching,” Will writes. “Then add the doctrine that the consent of a female who has been drinking might not protect a male from being found guilty of rape. Then comes costly litigation against institutions that have denied due process to males they accuse of what society considers serious felonies.”

      Legally, what do you find wrong with this?

  16. I’m left handed but found it to be an advantage. I’m far more adaptable and creative b/c I needed to be if I were to be productive with all the tools made for the righties. Did you know that even a screwdriver is made for righties? Scissors made for righties work just fine if you turn them over. Works fine for those with small hands. Had a painting teacher who didn’t know how to teach the specific strokes b/c she had never taught a lefty before. I put to ease by explaining that I had been learning from righties all my life – knitting, crocheting, etc. Lots of examples but I’ve got to run.

  17. mespo, That is hilarious and so clever. How did you ever come up with that questionnaire? Must have pulled an all nighter eh?

    1. mespo – Will’s commentary had to do with the fact that females are given special privileges in colleges and universities in rape charges. Males are not allowed to cross-examine them, have an attorney or take any of what would be considered ordinary legal steps to defend themselves.

Comments are closed.