Statuatory Rape: AKA Jailbate.

::bangs head on table:: Ok -- you missed my witty little double meaning. But that's ok. It was pretty obscure.

 

An eighteen year old/seventeen year old relationship is not statutory rape in any state. Statutory rape is defined as sex between an adult and a minor who is four or more years younger than the adult. You can find this in the books.

 

It depends on the state. Some states (like Virginia IIRC) limit it to 2 years difference, not 4.

Kimball Kinnison

 

Nunquam you are correct it is a shame that she has so little respect for herself. However, her behavior has not changed since turning 18, and frankly, she is responsible for her own bad judgement. While your argument that minors need protection from sexual predators is valid, the extended argument, that they need protection from themselves, is a glib statement from someone who has the benefit of experience. Whether that person be you, me, or lawmakers in a distant capital, kids will experiment, and there will never be a substitute for experience, even bad ones. We learn from them, they help define who we are. I can feel sorry for her, but it does not behoove me to tell her what to do, and magically turning 18 did not suddenly spark a major change in her behavior. She will have to grow up and learn for herself.

And I am arguing here from the viewpoint of teenagers having sex with other teenagers. While adult/teen sex does happen, I have stated before that I do not believe any consensual act can be labelled RAPE. Rape is forcible, without consent. The counter-argument is that teens are not capable of consent, which is absurd. We teach teenagers about the risks of sex in school, we make condoms available to all, as well as BCP's. We give them the tools, yet they are not capable of consent? The real argument here is that teens and consent are mutually exclusive. Nonsense. If child development texts claim that teenagers are not developed enough to give consent, the why does the law emancipate minors under specific circumstances? If a teenager is out on their own and they hold a steady job and support themselves, this short-cuts the developmental stages they have yet to traverse? Teenagers can consent to give blood, to have a sports physical, to have drug tests...why not have sex with somebody older? It's an identical argument to the idea that a person who is terminally ill and wishes to die cannot possibly be competent; no competent person would want to die. Such a viewpoint is naive at best, fascist at worst.

As far as the extremes or the news goes, so what?? The extremes miss one important point: they leave out the middle, which tends to make up the majority of cases. No one will object to the fact that a 40-yr old having sex with a 17-yr old is morally reprehensible; but to say that two teens having consensual sex is RAPE, with the record, the stigmata and the prison sentence that goes with such a conviction is, simply put, wrong.

End of Line.

V-03

 

I can understand how you wouldn't view consensual sex between an 18 year old and a 17 year old as rape. But, what about a 19 year old and a 16 year old? A 20 year old and a 15 year old? Or even the case that basicly started this thread?
When is a child no longer a child? As soon as they hit 13? As soon as they hit puberty? No. Thats nonsense. But thats what some of you would have the rest of us believe. A line MUST be drawn somewhere. In the case of an 18 year old and a 17 year old, that case would probably never even reach the courtroom. How would that even get reported to the police??? People do use common sense you know.

 

::Shakes head slowly and sighs:: No Ariana, it is you who missed my witty little triple meaning. But it was extra subtle.

If the 4yr or 2yr rule exists in all states than I don't really have as much of a problem with statutory rape (which is still too strong a word for a 20/17 age differential). I'm Canuckian, so my knowledge is based on media (film, television, etc...) and discussions with American friends.

Unfortunately, people don't always use common sense. I for one know a few fathers who would gladly go to court if their 17 daugther was dating an 18 year old.

 

RiggsWolfe your post was a rebuttal not a summary.

Actually I never said my post was a summary, what I said was that I included both my original post and your reply so someone who came to it fresh would understand the full context of our discussion.

Because I don't agree with your idea of whether sex between minors and adults should be permitted, I'm a "prude"? Gimme a break. You don't know anything about me or my attitudes about sex, but it makes it easier to dismiss me if you slap a label on me.

Actually, I cannot tell you how ironic it is that you speak of slapping labels on people to dismiss them. Read some of your own posts where you essentially call people who don't believe as you do molestors and rapists.

I believe teens need the same protection that other minors do. Maybe it's age -- I'm 36 -- and I see there is a BIG difference between teens and adults. Teens don't have the same level of maturity or experience as adults. Sorry, that's a fact. (Look it up in any child development or general psychology text.) I work at a university and deal with college students every day. I used to teach at a junior high school and had seen it everyday.

I am 30 and while I know that teens do not have the same level of maturity as adults, I know that most of them are no longer children. They are somewhere in between, 'tweens as I saw them called in a book I once read. I go to university and deal with them as well. And my experience has been that some are very immature, some are more mature than I am. You would lump them all together, I would not.

I've known plenty of women in my 36 years -- friends, acquaintances, girlfriends -- and most of the ones who behave/have behaved like the girl Vaderize03 talks about have profound problems from their childhood or teenage years. They're not the sexual demons you make them out to be.

I never made them out to be sexual demons, I just refuse to believe that 16 or 17 or 18 is some magic number. Some are truly ready before those numbers, some aren't ready til later. And while you talk about the older man sexual predator archetype, you tend to dismiss the equally valid Lolita archetype.

It's sad that she has so little respect for herself, and that there are so many men who eagerly take advantage of it.

Yes her feelings about herself are sad. Though I would say the men are being taken advantage of just as much as she is.

It's a shame that more women haven't posted in this thread, because I think you would find that many who had early sexual experiences look back on them unhappily or with emotional pain. (Re-read LadyVader's message.)

if LadyVader is the one I am thinking of, the underlying current in her post was that she was raped. Don't equate rape with consensual sex of any kind.

I chose extreme examples to make my point because everyone else was choosing extreme examples. Everyone kept referring to the star-crossed 17/18 year-old lovers, but didn't pause to consider the less romantic and ugly abuses that would occur. It happens daily, if you care to watch the news.

Alot of stuff happens daily according to the news. What they don't sure are the many more cases of totally normal events, including a normal healthy relationship between people with such an age difference.

My comment about the petition was to make people think about real-world opinions on adult-minor sex.

You know what they say about opinions, I'll give you a hint, it also relates to part of the human anatomy. I refuse to run my life based off of popular opinion. They call that being a sheep. I much prefer being a wolf.

People used "rigid religious systems" as an example in condoning teen/pre-teen marriage and condemning it and being the impetus behind the statutory rape law...well, what is it? Can't have it both ways. (I'm an atheist

 

Triple meaning?? Yeah...well...you missed my quadruple meaning!...








Yeah!

 

Well, Jerry Seindelf, a few years ago was dating a 17 year old girl. He was 40 at the time.

No one seemed to cry foul back then.

 

Why Statuatory Rape Laws Exist: "She enticed me..."

 

There's no statutory rape there. He's getting charged with sexual assault.

 

i dont think its v wise but rape is a bit harsh.

 

Dacks...
Don't get lost on the semantics. In most places, fourth-degree sexual assult is generally and simply "having sex without consent." No extenuating circumstances (threats of violence, violence, etc.), no specifics - it's a general, vague charge, able to cover many situations from "intoxication-rape," "drug-rape," and "statuatory rape."

That is one such law which can generally pass for "statuatory rape laws," but not the only one. Different places may call it different things and have their laws set up differently than where you live.

He was charged with numerous counts of 4-th degree sexual assult as well as worse crimes.

 

But the semantics are what I've been arguing this whole time.

If two people have consenting sex, but one is a minor, it's statutory rape. However, if it can be shown that the offender used authoritive means to coerce the individual into having sex, it is classified under sexual assault. That's the case here, you could prove in a court that the 10 year old was taken advantage of into having sex with the old man.

I have no problem if somebody who takes advantage of a minor gets accused of sexual assault. I do have a problem, however, when someone gets accused of "statutory rape" when it is obvious that both parties were mature enough and willing to engage in sexual activity.

For those who would argue that "who's gonna decided if someone's mature enough" etc... Well that's what we have judge and jury for. They do it all the time in other crimes, I don't see why it can't be used in statutory rape cases as well.

 

That story sickened me.

And to think it happened like 15 minutes from where I live.

 

Interesting quote from an article in the latest issue of Time Magazine (the Yoda one).

"Those attracted to teenagers are sometimes said to suffer "ephebophilia," but perhaps because so many youth-obsessed Americans would qualify, psychiatrists don't classify ephebophilia as an illness."

So calling an adult who wants to sleep with a 15 year old a sick pedophile is in fact incorrect.

 

What about 13? Or 14??

 

13 or 14 is probably too young, however I did know a 14 yr old freshman at my school knock up a 18 yr old senior.

 

Wow it took a while to read all tose postings so I'll try not to be redundant, bear with me.
1. Rape is defined as forced intercourse. If one person impairs the judgement of another (by alcohol or other drugs)and has intercourse they are IN MOST STATES guilty of rape. They removed the victim's will to resist as if with a weapon.

2.More and more states have moved over the last 15 years to protect children from thi type of crime. In Ohio anyone under 13 (in the context of sex crimes)is a child. Between 13-15 is a minor. There are four-year and ten-year exceptions. EXAMPLE: One person is 14 and the other is 19. The 19 year-old is guilty of "illegal sex with a minor" which is a 4th degree felony. In Ohio, the lowest class of felony. If one is 14 and another is 25. The age difference is more than 10 years it becomes a 3rd degree felony with increased jail and fines.Logic being an increased probability of coersion. If one is 15 and another is 18, the crime is reduced to a 1st degree misdemeanor, the strictest mis., but lesser than a 4th felony. In any case where both are 16 or older, all bets are off and consentual intercourse is permitted.

3. The above is for Ohio, but many states have tiers that define "sexual imposition", or "unlawsful sex with a minor" or "stuatory rape", etc. Investigate your local laws to see where you stand, before you lie....sorry had to lighten this up somehow.

4. This just takes into account the letter of the law. The spirit of the law, must be answered by your friend. It's posssible to be an ignorant (of the law) criminal or an innocent (of the crime) jack@##. You're the best one to answer that question.

One final thought Obi-Wan Mc...If your friend/brother is involving this girl with acohol, or drugs he is opening himself to more and harsher criminal charges. Your fraternity would also be at risk if something happened on-property, regardless of your fraternity policies. If police show up or this girl would ever change her tune on the consent issue...suffice to say the PR and litigation could literally destroy your brotherhood.

Sorry this wandered off topic a little, but just trying to give you a different slant.

 

I don't get it. I'll probably get my head
bit off by a few ppl but WTF ever.

Sex, in a way, is an expression of emotion. I really don't see how this is such a crime. I mean, 13,14,15 year olds KNOW what they're doing. They're not completely emotionally immature. People ALWAYS cry "ignorance" for children of this age group and that is total BS. Day to day these 13, 14, 15 year olds have contact w/20, 21, 22 year olds and noone spaz's over 'contact' with them. That's all it is: contact. If parents don't want their kids screwing around w/adults, they should supervise them better. It's also wrong how they base it on age. I was 13 before (most of you have of course) and you knew wrong from right. Don't tell me you didn't. Also, scientific studies have shown that before you are 25, there's this huge black whole in the front of our brains. That's judgement. So, why have they chosen the age of 18? What's so dirty about the age of 18?

 

Well, I'm 36 now, and I know for a fact that I was in no way prepared at age 13 for decisions I make as an adult. I've worked with 11, 12 and 13 year-olds...they are not prepared to make adult decisions, especially ones that could impact them for life (pregnancy, herpes, AIDS, repercussions from physical trauma, etc.).

Sure, maybe a minority of them are able to handle it, but that is no justification for removing or weakening laws which protect the majority of children/minors who are not able to handle it.

Besides, Tuebor showed above that the law takes into account special circumstances.

 

Then again, I'm not a people person.
I'll be the old lady up on the hill
w/her tremendous amount of cats which
she sends down twice a day to attack
innocent pedestrians. The system is so
screwed up. Or is it. Hey, they get paid
for this...

 

Sending them to attack pedestrians.. now why didnt I think of that...

 

Well, I suppose I should get my opinion in:

As a sixteen-year-old part-time Theater Major at a local Presbyterian College, I've had to deal with this sort of issue. Let's put it this way: I'm the ONLY sixteen-year old part-time Theater Major there, (emphasis on the "sixteen-year-old" I took the GED so I could go to this program at this college as a Theater Major) Now, in the state where I live, eighteen is the limit. I know a lot of eighteen year old boys whom I wouldn't mind going out with (I certainly NEVER would consider sex) but I think I know that most of them look on me as either jailbait, or a deathtrap. Other than that, I'm just a friend.

I think that the statuatory laws are good because I know a lot of girls my age, and they should not be in a position where they would date older guys. I know girls who are TWENTY-ONE who shouldn't be dating older guys. People have told me that I'm very mature for my age, but I respect those laws in that they are very valuable in most cases.

A 15 year old and almost 22? Bad idea. Your friend could get into a lot of trouble, and I mean a LOT of trouble.

 

All right, let me put my $.02 in here. I haven't read all 7 pages; so forgive me if I reiterate what others have said. I am 15 years old, currently I am sorta-seeing a 20-year old. He's told me that he doesn't care about the age difference, adn treats me with all the respect that a goddess like me deserves.

I'm not planning to sleep with either of him, but if I did I don't think that he should go to jail if I allowed it. Statuary rape is a tricky issue, obviously. True, children should be protected, but its hard to define an exact age.

IMHO, if either a guy or girl who is younger than 18 files a complaint of being forced to have sex by someone over 18 it should be treated as rape. If someone just happens to finds out, it should not be. Should the minor say that they were forced it could be prosecuted as a rape case, perhaps with extra penalties. Remember, rape is a forced, violent crime ? cases of the abuser having a certain relationship (family usually) with the abused are usually prosecuted to a higher punishment, all ready. If they were willing to state that they had agreed to the relationships and to having sex then leave them be ? leave it up to the parents to decide.