General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFFS people. The world is not the finely tuned binary a lot of you seem to believe...
18 and 19 year olds have sex. So do 14 year olds.
Whether or not the latter is a good idea is debatable. The two groups having sex together? Considerably more ethically questionable.
Can a 14 year old consent to sex? I guess that depends almost entirely on the individual in question.
Is it a good idea to send 18 or 19 year olds to prison and make them lifetime sex offenders for having consensual sex with a 14 year old?
Hell fucking no. It boggles the mind that anyone would assume otherwise.
If a 17 year old has sex with another minor, it may be regarded as an unwise decision. The 17 year old may even be viewed as predatory in the sense that the situation proved advantageous to his or her desires. But it's not illegal so we'll just let it slide.
God help you if you inevitably get one day older and cross into adulthood. Because then you're a sick fuck who broke the law. And we send sick fucks who break laws to prison where they belong. As we all know, prisons are perfect places for young men and women to learn to be non-violent, emotionally and intellectually mature, contributing members of a reasonable society.
Have we so regressed as a community that the only viable option/punishment/education we can conjure up is a prison sentence? Are we not satisfied unless at least one person's life is ruined?
RC
(25,592 posts)qualification seems to be that they voted for Obama.
Sorry, but Liberals and Progressives usually have a quality known as "Empathy". Lack of empathy usually indicates sociopathic tendencies. The hallmark of the Republicans.
Mnemosyne
(21,363 posts)compassion, we become the ones with no compassion". It should be so simple.
There used to be a much more empathetic and compassionate atmosphere here...
quinnox
(20,600 posts)gressive thinks or means. Lock-steppers are useless and boring in their opinions, they are almost always all the same.
Just because you voted for Obama doesn't mean you are a liberal or a progressive. It is not automatic, that's for sure.
Just check out the threads on Tornadoes in Oklahoma,
and the DUers who insist that the people who live in Oklahoma deserve it.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)melissaf
(379 posts)was a victim of statutory rape. How you you think this person feels with everyone defending statutory rape perpetrators? Maybe you're the one who needs a little empathy.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)It comes in many different forms. But statutory rape laws were born from Christian moral inquisitions. They pay little or no respect to the young men and women they are supposedly protecting.
melissaf
(379 posts)I'm sure there's a lot of people who used to think (or think now) that rape is such an absurd concept. I'm also completely positive that if we had no statutory rape laws, the Jerry Sanduskys of the world would proudly say "Yes, your honor, I'm not guilty because he TOTALLY wanted it."
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)The connection between the two is spurious.
How we define consent is what's important. If we define it as being only deliverable upon one's 16th or 17th or 18th birthday, than we have established consent as arbitrary. And it is by this process that we, unwittingly or not, further degrade the concept of consent being linked with one's intellectual and emotional maturity. Intangibles that cannot be established by sweeping and blind law.
melissaf
(379 posts)"groom" their victims into willingness.
This is all an intellectual exercise, anyhow. If you think the law is wrong, change it. See how many people show up on your side.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)melissaf
(379 posts)who's linked to above how she ought to feel empathy for statutory rape perpetrators?
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)who refer to those who participate in consensual sex as "perpetrators."
melissaf
(379 posts)that some teenager knowingly broke the law in the state of Florida? Or anywhere? You don't even know my thoughts on the issue. That's what I LOOOOOOOVE about conversations on the Internets--everyone's a mind-reader.
If you'll follow the link, you'll see that the comment had nothing to do with Kaitlyn Hunt. It had to do with a 19-year-old man who PLED GUILTY to statutory rape with a juvenile under 15. The poster has no empathy with the perpetrator (because, in fact, he is not alleged--he PLED GUILTY) because she believes that statutory rape should be prosecuted. I think she shouldn't be forced by anyone on this board to have empathy for this 19-year-old man or our girl Kate just because other people like these two and feel that statutory rape laws are persecutory. Because, you know, the poster is a VICTIM. If you think she ought to show due deference to the perpetrator because young love is so beautiful and consensual and all, then you've lost me on that one.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Especially people who are potentially innocent from committing any crime whatsoever.
melissaf
(379 posts)victims should be GIVEN LEEWAY.
Do you have to listen to victims? Nope, it's your prerogative not to. Should you shut them up because you feel your pal is "potentially innocent"? No. DU is not a court of law. People have different opinions, and I'm not going to shout down a RAPE VICTIM, not even on the Interwebs.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Like I said, I wrote this OP because of people like you. You're only proving my point with your reactionary posts.
melissaf
(379 posts)then you can ignore my reactionary posts. If that's all the argument you can muster, if you don't feel a shred of decency about shutting up a victim of rape, then toodles to you.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)By furthering the false perception that age is a proper indicator of consent, that consent is not actually based on emotional or intellectual maturity, you are in fact serving to remove the already limited agency of rape victims.
melissaf
(379 posts)who feels he/she is a victim of statutory rape. See how he/she feels about your oh-so-Foucaultian intellectual argument.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)melissaf
(379 posts)to show how DU is lacking in "empathy."
(Yes, I know, you're not either. Have a chat with some of your empathetic friends downthread.)
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)AnalystInParadise
(1,832 posts)18 year old adult woman that molested a child? Is that the woman you want me to talk to? That 18 year old ADULT woman that can vote, that can enter into contracts on her own, that can own property, and that can enter into the military to fight for her country on her own? Is that the woman you want me to ask? Because by all reckoning of American society that woman is an adult and that adult fucked a child. We have a word for people like that.......criminal.....You are free to fight to change those laws and change American society, but today June 1st 2013, that 18 year old woman is an adult and that adult had sex with a child. That adult is a criminal.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)At least know what you're talking about before trying to act like the law or social order is so clearly defined.
AnalystInParadise
(1,832 posts)That's the only argument, I or the prosecution will need in this case.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Great.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)10th and 12th grade, respectively.
I can say with confidence that at that time the 2.5 year age difference didn't make any difference in our readiness for a relationship.
We've been married 30 years now.
The poster's stated belief is that I should have gone to jail. My empathy stops at the point where people turn their bad experiences into revenge on the innocent.
melissaf
(379 posts)be extrapolated into losing your empathy for rape victims in general? "Well, when you go and accuse my buddy of rape, well that's just where my empathy ends."
I'm glad that you've had such a long and successful marriage. I still don't think you ought to be insisting on empathy for statutory rape perpetrators from someone who's a victim.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)It's an unattainable expectation, but expecting the opposite is a bad starting point for conversation.
If you're telling my buddy's wife/girlfriend that she's mistaken... that she's actually his victim, then you're right, I give the argument few empathy points.
Statutory rape laws differ in each state, in part because the task is nearly impossible. Every young man and every young woman reaches the degree of maturity necessary to have an adult relationship at a different age. Judges have to make these calls after significant interaction with the kids involved.
melissaf
(379 posts)I'm not feeling a whole lot of empathy for you. Call it irrationality, or whatever you want. I tend to give rape and sexual abuse victims a lot of leeway when discussing rape cases in which there's lots of sympathy for the alleged perpetrator. Just like I give leeway to victims of other crimes when discussing the gray areas of said crimes. I don't think they should be forced to show empathy at all. So if the whole basis for your argument that DU is not "empathetic" is that a victim (who happens to have knowledge of statutory rape) thinks people should be prosecuted for statutory rape, then I think your example is a bit flawed.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)melissaf
(379 posts)that the poster wasn't empathizing with pled guilty to sex with someone "under 15." What if that younger child was 14 or 13 or 12? Still think he's an innocent?
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)All she knows is
a) his gender
b) his age
c) the word "rape"
At least the outrage over Kristin has produced enough information to know what she has been accused of, if only to excuse it.
Igel
(35,387 posts)It's main point was that having equal empathy for everybody is pointless. If you empathize as much with the Nazi with the gun and boots as with the emaciated Jew on the ground that he's kicking and about to shoot, you stand there paralized.
All empathy not only is partial--we empathize with those we empathize with--but it *should* be partial. And it just happened that partial empathy properly and only properly looks just like what the NYT times editorial board's empathy. (Thus showing that if you're going to have partial empathy, the first and foremost beneficiary is, of course, always yourself.)
Kids lack empathy. This generation, if the entering college survey is any indication, has record low empathy for the last 50-60 years. A lot of entering college frosh a couple of years ago didn't know what the word meant, and when the survey team tried to explain it had trouble understanding it (or thought it a foolish idea).
For most people "empathy" is just another word for in-group bonding. You justify those in your group because you can see yourself needing their help. You vilify those outside of your group because the group boundaries are stronger and you're more clearly on *this* side of that boundary. It doesn't often lead to much action by a person; more often it leads to calls for others to take action and do things. And since that action is most often to benefit your group, a lot of empathy is masked selfishness.
So, yeah, empathy is pretty selective. But as an ideal it's a fine and dandy one, even if so few actually stop to think what it would entail.
It was a slam-dunk for my mother, at one time a poor single-parent who suffered wage discrimination and whose husband once hit her, to empathize with poor, single mothers, women suffering wage discrimination, and battered wives. It was very difficult for her to empathize with black men who suffered wage discrimination, single fathers, or anybody who wasn't a loyal (D). She quite often found joy in other's suffering, however. Rich white guy has family killed, she'd laugh, and she'd only pause to feel sorry for the wife (who, well, had had it good) and either girls or infants. Selective empathy at its finest. And quite vile.
Next up on the menu: DU champions the Spit in a Cup lessons! Abstinence-only! It's totally progressive!
And this thread joins the rest of the blood-pressure-raising teen sex threads in the trash can.
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)Where is your empathy for sociopaths and Republicans?
Since your post does not seem to have empathy for them, should we, by the logic of your post, conclude that you have sociopathic tendencies, which is the hallmark of the Republicans?
Uzair
(241 posts)Logical
(22,457 posts)RC
(25,592 posts)Get real. If all you have is worse case, you don't really have a case.
Logical
(22,457 posts)didn't answer the question. 19 year old and a 13 year old? Punish the 19 year old? Yes/no?
RC
(25,592 posts)http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022930360#post86
Then, instead of throwing them in jail at 18, we waited till they were 21. 18 year olds then, were still teenagers, usually in high school. 19-20 was a grey area.
Sorry, but my world is shades of grey and hues of color. I can't get behind all this binary, black and white, tick-of-the-clock drop dead time, on something that is in reality nebulous, fuzzy and depends on the people involved and the situation.
I believe in fuzzy logic. It works where the binary 0/1 logic does not.
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/Groups/AI/html/faqs/ai/fuzzy/part1/faq-doc-2.html
Logical
(22,457 posts)RC
(25,592 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Warpy
(111,437 posts)I agree with you that it depends on the 14 year old. My own yardstick is whether or not s/he is mature enough to take care of birth control and disease protection.
Kids don't mature at the same rate, something a lot of people seem to have forgotten here.
Then again, people like hard and fast answers and lines drawn in sand.
This is one of those messy things that has to be decided on a case by case basis, and no, a birthday doesn't make a damned bit of difference.
Chances are that if parents had stayed out of this, the affair would have died a natural death by now instead of becoming a cause celebre.
Sen. Walter Sobchak
(8,692 posts)Kids don't mature at the same rate, and erring on the side of a fourteen year old having any sexual sophistication at all is ridiculous. And I have no children what-so-ever and am physically incapable of such.
I don't believe to be progressive one has to be an unjudging libertine.
Warpy
(111,437 posts)just like I knew some 18 year olds, myself included, who were naive beyond belief. Oh, I knew the mechanics and what to do to avoid babies, I was just a very late bloomer.
I'm saying the kids need to be looked at individually to find out where they're at emotionally.
Trying to make a one size fits all law for this stuff is futile and ultimately cruel to a lot of kids who are exploring their sexuality, mostly in the name of control and not protection.
And one birthday doesn't make any difference.
Sen. Walter Sobchak
(8,692 posts)And there is absolutely nothing wrong with society prevented older teens and adults from exploiting those who might be exploring their sexuality.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)There's US, and there's THEM. We'll take the high road and they'll take the low road, and never the twain shall meet.
Or so I'm told...
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)They weren't telling you anything, they were just singing.
GoneOffShore
(17,345 posts)Or retribution.
And you MUST think of the children.
Unless it's actually about the children.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)And that is part of the reason why those toeing the line for prison sentences are making such a despicable spectacle of anti-abuse advocates.
The military and prison. The two are remarkable in their ability to turn people into monsters. Yet they are both seen as havens of discipline.
quinnox
(20,600 posts)ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)GoneOffShore
(17,345 posts)And saying who would be a call out.
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)I have seen people say that some things are immoral, such as slavery, murder, etc., but that is different than saying the world is black and white.
GoneOffShore
(17,345 posts)I guess you don't read the posts by the resident authoritarians, et al.
YMMV
Quantess
(27,630 posts)Yes, it's the left-knee-jerk.
Squinch
(51,083 posts)Quantess
(27,630 posts)In general, yes. But occasionally you can see arguments from liberals that are pretty reactionary, hypervigilant. It can happen.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)These laws were created to protect the very young. There is no wave of the magic want that will remove the law from the books and leave it to individual choice.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)They have everything to do with what Michel Foucault refers to as the "scientia sexualis" and the false narrative of age and innocence.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)is not yet completely formed, I disagree with you and Mr. Focault. It is important to protect the young from predators whatever their age.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)And it is not the case that I am on the opposing side of such a statement. Neither is Michel Foucault. Who has spoken extensively on just that fact.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)and on knowledge from studies that show the 14 year old brain is not fully mature. (The studies I've seen found that the human brain is not completely mature until around 21.) If Mr. Foucault cares to speak here, it will not change my position. One of the greatest responsibilities of an adult and especially a parent is to protect their children until they reach a level of maturity where they can protect themselves. By law, that age for most things is 18. Nowhere is it 14. In reality it is a difficult juggling act and all parent make mistakes.
I've taught my children that the appropriate age difference for those they date, by a rule of thumb, is half your age plus 7. Even if that were somehow passed into law, an 18 year old should not date or fuck anyone under 16.
I know this in in general reference to the young woman that took a young girl out of her parents house without their permission and slept with her. I don't feel that sending the 18 year old to jail on statutory rape charges is the appropriate response. Some kind of court required counseling would be a better idea. I understand why the parents were upset.
When it comes to matters of the heart and the sex organs, most adults screw it up as often as they get it right. So we should take extra care with children who don't have the benefit of years of screwed up relationships and bad decisions when wrestling with their hormones.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)And just to get the facts straight on that case, the 14 year old ran away from home. The 18 year old did not take her.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)I had heard it the other way around.
However, I still think that most 14 year olds are not yet ready for relationships and the age of consent is a good idea.
As I said, I am not sure that the appropriate punishment is to jail the 18 year old.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)In other words, 14 year olds are absolutely capable of being in relationships depending on how we define "relationship."
Do I think 14 year olds should be getting married? Probably not. Am I going to freak out if a couple teens are having sex? Probably not. Of course, that can absolutely change based on the circumstance. But statutory rape laws have little or no concern for circumstance.
Squinch
(51,083 posts)Last edited Sun Jun 2, 2013, 10:40 AM - Edit history (1)
I can't imagine you think that a 7-year-old is capable, or a 10-year-old.
Presumably there is some age in which "circumstance" does not enter the equation of whether a child is able to provide consent, and at that age it is unquestionably molestation. So if not at 14, where would you put it?
RC
(25,592 posts)There really is something to the "Don't trust anyone over 30" mantra of the 60's and 70's.
There is a big difference between 21 and 24 year olds. And 24 and 30 year olds.
Maybe we should raise the age of adulthood to 30 and keep them innocent until then, and see how that word out. And maybe raise the age of consent to .... Oh, like 24? Laws are meant to be and must be followed, so that will work correct?
immoderate
(20,885 posts)Is sex an injury? Brains develop far past 14 years old. And having sex, aside from trauma, has no effect.
--imm
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)Hell, I know a lot of adults who are easily manipulated by anyone that says, "I love you."
So when would you put it? Would it have been OK for a 12 year old to do the horizontal dance with an 18 year old. Should that 14 year old girl have been getting on with a 50 year old? If sex is never an injury and the body is receptive, do you think they should boink who ever they want, when ever they want, and at what ever age they happen to be?
I think an age of consent of 14 is a good compromise. Some 14 year olds, I am sure, understand the consequences of what their doing. Most I have know do not.
immoderate
(20,885 posts)I still suggest that the circumstances would be extremely rare that would cause actual harm from consensual sex.
--imm
Occulus
(20,599 posts)Parts of the human brain are still developing well in an adult's 20's.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)but just letting everyone screw anyone isn't the answer.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)....get em young, and teach them how to enjoy sex....then you are innocent because they liked it...which means they consented...
Yep that is how the pedophile works....it is really love so it is not a crime and love is good for kids.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets. - Voltaire
treestar
(82,383 posts)neither can consent, they should both be guilty of an offense.
The problem here is there should be some room to differentiate teen romance from predators.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)From 2006
http://www.denverpost.com/ci_4783650
One thirteen year old kid and one twelve year old kid became sex offenders for offenses against each other after the girl got pregnant. I'm sure they are very grateful for our protection.
Edited to correct for the boy's age.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)better. We've had plenty of laws that were bad laws, just because something is 'the law' doesn't mean it is good.
Setting up an 18 year old for life as a 'predator' IS a bad law, or would be in a society that doesn't believe jail and a Scarlet Letter is the cure for everything.
galileoreloaded
(2,571 posts)my friend.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)By building a false narrative around age, sex, intelligence and innocence.
galileoreloaded
(2,571 posts)stop being part of the problem.
terms like "false narrative" are patriarchal in nature. you need a gender studies class methinks.
yes actually means no....havent you heard?
chervilant
(8,267 posts)is unnecessary, and quite telling. Do you support patriarchy? Sexism?
If our society had a healthy and mature appreciation of our sexuality, if we taught our younglings about responsible sex (eg, birth control and STDs), if we didn't go all medieval about a fourteen year old being sexually active (as *SO* very many are), then the only objection here might be driven by the pervasive homophobia among us.
I was sexually abused as a child. I was not protected by my straight-laced parents, whose puritanical standards rendered any discussion of sex verboten. I didn't escape my abuser until I went to college, where my roommate fielded all his calls and 'took messages' that I never had to see.
I never got to choose who gave me my first kiss, my first orgasm -- or *ANY* of my sexual "firsts." I don't feel qualified to assert that fourteen year olds (in general) are mentally, emotionally and physically prepared to be sexually active. However, with parents like mine (and those who push abstinence, and refuse to accept that a fourteen year old would *want* to have sex), that likelihood is slim.
Oh, and, NO means NO. If you're the slightest bit unclear on that issue, perhaps *you* need a "gender studies class."
galileoreloaded
(2,571 posts)That elevate either gender over the other despite the horrific stories that they share as individuals.
Has civilization used control mechanisms (such as religion) to control women in the past, absolutely. But those mechanisms also controlled men. In 2013 the landscape is vastly different and any night out in any major city will show you that women as a whole have tossed off those chains and are out living quite free of any restrictions.
As a male I am also now free of oppressive thoughts. I don't have to worry about making a ton of money or providing for a woman in order to drive attraction because they are usually better able to provide than i am. So I don't. Gender roles have reversed drastically in the last 5 years and for the male willing to stay active, refine his social skills, never marry, never have children, and not buy into the antiquated bullshit "provider/protector" meme, institutional feminism is the best thing ever.
No responsibility, unlimited access to unrestricted females, no working yourself into an early grave for ......?
So I support equalism, and call out any trope that attempts to elevate primacy in either gender, and additionally, I will also call out any and all double standards when discussing things such as setting aside a statutory rape conviction for any reason once the threshold (age of victim/abuser) has been met. It shouldn't matter what gender either is.
Make sense?
chervilant
(8,267 posts)and delimiting socio-political construct for both genders, and certainly for all sexual orientations. I find your description of your "emancipation" quite intriguing. Would that more young men had such epiphanies.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)...reminds me of the conservative caricature in "The Missionary" who declares, "This country would be better off if more people were chained up."
It is an entirely punitive mentality that seems often to derive from one's own sense of having been unjustly punished, and seeking to inflict punishment - invariably of the harshest most inhumane kind - on others.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)I just hate it when you're right.
Fortunately, it doesn't happen all that often.
Bette Noir
(3,581 posts)If two kids were dating as minors, and one of them turns 18, it doesn't suddenly become a crime. They have to be within three years in age, though, so even under California law the older girl in this case still has a problem.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)And the only enlightenment I've seen come of it is a few people realizing that ethics and law don't always match.
Which anyone who's spent more than a few minutes thinking about either topic should have already figured out.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)because the line for certain aspects of legal adulthood has to be somewhere, and putting it there makes sense.
Getting rid of all speed limits- or age of consent laws- seems a little insane to me. I do think that the law ought to make allowances for people who are, for instance, all high school age students. Like 18 with 16, or 15 isn't the same as 40 with 15. Obviously.
18 and 14? 14 is pretty young, and given the circumstances of that particular case, I think it's a tough call. I don't know what the repercussions should be, but I don't know either if I'd say it's "okay" in any and all circumstances.
One thing I can say with certainty is that any and all laws in this regard need to be enforced fairly and equally regardless of the genders or orientations of any of the people involved.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Not all of which have anything to do with sex. And each kind of consent is different and therefore has different variables and therefore different restrictions. To set an across the board age of consent is ridiculous. To even assign certain age restrictions to different kinds of consent is generally foolish.
I'm not commenting on the speed limit part because it's a false equivalency and I don't give a shit beyond that.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)how would YOU define consentual sex? Also,how would you account for the fact that the older person is often in a position to dominate the younger one?
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)We distinguish between adults and non-adults in all kinds of societal and legal matters, particularly having to do with sex, and we do so for some fairly understandable and logical reasons.
Maybe you disagree. But it's a facet of reality that isn't likely to go anywhere.
AnalystInParadise
(1,832 posts)Eighteen seems like the perfect place to place these laws. There are many other laws that go into effect when you are 18, this was just a good start
When are you allowed to vote? 18
When are you allowed to own property? 18
Allowed to sign contracts? 18
Allowed to adopt a child? 18
Become a stripper? 18
Rent a house? 18
Finance a car? 18
Join the military without parental consent? 18
Go to adult jail for fucking a child? 18
treestar
(82,383 posts)It is absurd for the same relationship to be legal today and illegal tomorrow.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)YeahSureRight
(205 posts)at 18 you could legally drink back in the day of yore ....
Anyway, we all knew at 18 we could be arrested for statutory rape or the Mann Act just for taking a under age girl to a concert in another city. I lived within 40 miles of 2 other states and going to concerts in other states was not uncommon and it was not uncommon for the sheriffs to have road blocks on concert nights looking to arrest anyone they could for anything they could.
When one turns 18 one needs to stop messing with those under age, period, you are now legally an adult and need to stop playing with children.
Gray areas and wiggle room only cause problems.
Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)I think that a 17 year old having consensual sex with a 14 year old should seldom if ever be jailed, but a 19 year old usually should be (although the judge should have some discretion in exceptional cases).
18 is a harder line to draw.
But if you want to scream "lack of empathy", remember that being seduced by an adult (or even by another child) at 14 is likely to emotionally and socially, and possibly physically, damage a child, and they deserve protection from that too.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)flexible so that individual factors can be taken into account.
but parents should have the ability to protect their children.
Avalux
(35,015 posts)Being aware of those laws and the penalties if broken, are part of growing up and becoming an adult.
Do I think this 18 year old should be jailed for having a sexual relationship with a 14 year old? I have no real opinion because I don't know the individuals or the circumstances involved in the relationship. It might have been consensual, it might have been coercive...it doesn't really matter what I think, because the law says it's wrong.
Being 17 one day, then having a birthday and being 18 the next doesn't automatically change a person's maturity. But turning 18 does have legal implications because they are now considered an adult, and as an adult, it must be understood there are life-altering consequences if a choice is made to have sex with a minor.
Maybe the relationship truly is consensual, they are in love and can't keep their hands off each other. Doesn't really matter.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)However, you make an extremely subjective claim, which is also a strawman.
This claim is not objective truth. We can't prove for falsify this claim. This claim is a statement of faith.
Additionally, I have not seen anyone here make this claim. Seems like you are creating a false argument, and then arguing against it, which is fallacious.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Florida has a "Romeo and Juilet" clause in the law. Many states do. There world is not as binary as you seem to think it is.
You really should educate yourself a little on a subject before posting on it, just a little. You really should self delete this.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)And, even then, you don't seem to understand the title.
So if anyone should be deleting anything, it should be you deleting your response.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)First off, a 14 year old can't legally consent to sex. There is a legal age of consent and 14 isn't it. Next, nobody would be sending Kaitlyn to jail for having sex with a 14 year old, she simply rejected a plea bargain that she should have accepted. Her sentence is now her choice, not the system's.
There are also exceptions to the age of consent law. Things are not as binary as you seem to think. You are the one who has the facts wrong.
http://www.ehow.com/info_8598310_florida-statutory-rape-laws.html
^snip^
Exceptions to Age of Consent
Florida has exceptions to the age of consent. Primarily, Florida applies these exceptions to persons with a disability. Another exception, by Florida law, is the distinction between age of consent and legal age of consent. Under this distinction, a person 16 or 17 years of age can consent to sex with someone who is not older than 24. In Florida, a person under the age of 24 will not be charged with statutory rape unless the 16 or 17 year old is disabled or has not consented to the sex act.
Seriously, self delete. Your post is disgraceful.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)At least three states have the age of consent pegged at 14.
The exceptions have absolutely nothing to do with my argument because we are talking about a 14 year old and an 18 or 19 year old. Not a 16 or 17 year old and someone younger than 24.
Again, you clearly did not pay attention to anything I've said. And it is terribly ironic that you want me to delete my posts.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)I paid attention to everything.
You are distorting the truth to serve your purposes. The age of consent in Florida isn't 14 and since we are talking about a specific instance the laws in the other states don't matter.
I know we are not talking about someone 16 or 17 with someone younger than 24. That was my point (if only you were paying attention). The laws are not binary. The exceptions do exist and an 18 year old with a 14 year old does not qualify as one of those exceptions.
This thread and your constant distortions of reality are disgraceful. I honestly thought that people come here for sanity and truth. You have forced me to reconsider that belief.
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)All states are 16, 17 or 18. Maybe you're referring to a close in age exemption?
http://www.age-of-consent.info/
RC
(25,592 posts)Then you could vote, drink, smoke, and screw around with anyone willing, who was also 21 or over, starting with your 21st birthday.
Then the Viet Nam war happened and the age of maturity was dropped to 18, three years younger, because that was the age you, as a male, could be drafted for canon fodder and you had no vote in the matter, because you were not yet 21. No other reason.
But, you were still not fully an adult, in the eyes of the law. Laws prohibiting smoking and booze until 21, were still in affect some places. Other places allowed one or the other, or both at 18.
The 'Who Could Fuck Who Laws' also had to be adjusted. After all, that immature 18 year old, teenager was suddenly a mature adult now, with the passage of the law applying "Adulthood" at 18.
No longer could an 18 year old safely date a 14 or 15 year old. Or sometimes even a 16 year old, even though you could still get married at those ages, depending on the state. Some states had the age of consent at 14, even with someone over the age of 21. It was all good, in whatever state, at the time, till some blue noses tried to set the age of consent, hard lined at 18 - And they took the booze and cigarettes away too.
It all eventually shook out to what we have now. It is still shaking.
What escapes many here is the fact relationships are not stamped out like cookies. We do not all 'mature' at the same rate, or even to the same levels of maturity, no matter how old we are, or may get to be. Each relationship is unique and changing. At best, they only loosely follow some formula or another. Age, maturity, personality, experiences of both, all play apart. What works with one couple, is detrimental to another. What is glue for some couples, is a solvent that ends the relationship for others.
Just because it doesn't work for you, doesn't mean it can't work for others. Just because you are 18 or 21, does not necessarily mean you are mature. Just because you are only 14 or 15 does not mean you are not mature. It depends on the individual. And sometimes the situation.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)Or to execute the severely mentally handicapped.
To cheer on the most barbaric conditions in the prisons they can't fill up fast enough.
And to then claim they are liberals.
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)And then some