At least I think that is what they are referring to
I was looking up so old crimes in the historical archive of the Chicago Tribune and I came across this:
Don’t you love the way this 1923 Chicago Tribune Article describes this lady. She killed her husband and the reason for it.
Ah, the good old days.
It’s always the woman’s fault! What happened to her–was she convicted?
83 years later and the term “Buttsecks” is common Internet parlance.
Back then though I guess buggery was not only scandalous, it was illegal in many places. (Isn’t that law still on the books in some backwater town?)
Actually no, I followed it up and it said that
That’s awesome. I doubt if a woman could use feigned incompetence as a defense today. Ah, the good old days.
Dumb broad.
Is this the world’s worst pun or a fantastic Spoonerism? Or just a typo? I do hope it actually appeared in the paper that way. 
Ailment 
That has to be deliberate – as deliberate as the obit for Leopold or Loeb that said that his death in prison (at the hands of another inmate who made sexual advances that he turned down) was “the first time someone was killed for ending a sentence with a proposition.”
I’m still surprised, and more than a little suspicious. I’d expect any sort of description, especially back then, to be either completely nonspecific, or to call it “Sodomy”.
It’s “alimentary”, Watson.
Not it’s ailment I mispelled it
What, like the back of a horse wagon?
Not just some backwater town. I’m pretty sure those laws still exist all throughout America. Maybe even in your own home state. Hopefully a legal expert can come by and give a more thorough (and accurate) explanation.
By and large they simply choose not to enforce them.
Her husband was a pain in the ass, so she shot him? They couldn’t make bullets fast enough if that was justifiable homicide…
Wait. What? Isn’t there only one place where, if it happens, it’s buggery?
In Virginia, it’s legal to have sex with girls at the age of majority, but you have to wait a few years longer to legally have anal sex.
Since Lawrence v. Texas it is illegal to enforce laws against private consensual sodomy. Criminal sodomy (by which I mean rape), of course can still be a crime.
Couldn’t they just call it rape?
