Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto
Smooth...
OK, if you believe adolescents can engage in "mature" or "adult" sexual relationships, at what age do you believe they cannot?
If not 16, how about 14? Maybe 12?
What the hell, let's say 10?
The point is, any and all legal cut-off points are, by definition, arbitrary and artificial. But a legal cut-off point there must be.
In most Western societies this age is 16.
Any sexual relationship with someone under that age is legally rape. You can argue how "this particular tennager" or "that very mature boy" or "that coquettish 14 girl" are different as much as you like. But the law cannot, and indeed should not, take that into account. To do so would erode the whole basis upon which modern society and laws are based; common acceptance of social mores and standards defined and regulated through the existence of laws.
Now you know me and that I'm no lawyer. I have not studied the law like you, so you may have a legal retort to my position.
But the fact remains that this girl was raped. The law stipulates that it cannot have been consensual, no matter how much anyone claims it to be, due to what is considered their immature understanding of what is right and wrong. They are deemed incapable of making a mature consenual decision.
Add to this the fact that a teacher abused this child and the case gets worse. I won't even go there, as I get rather hot under the collar when child sexual abuse (and this is what it is, both morally and legally) are defended.
Mr Mephisto
PS - When you coming Down Under? I owe you and your missus a few beers!
|
Mephisto, I don't know how you derived that 16 years is the mode for sexual consent, but I'm suspicious of its accuracy.
I think a reasonable cut-off point should be determined case by case rather than thinking all adolescents are incapable of autonomous decisions regarding their own sexuality:
Quote:
Originally Posted by smooth
At least a few other countries have established special court proceedings where either the minor, the adult, or a person close to either party can bring their perspective to bear on whether the relationship is consensual or exploitative. I support that method of dealing with minors who wish to engage in sexual intimacy with older partners--not stigmatization and/or criminalizing their or their partner's behavior.
|
This woman wasn't her teacher anymore. The relationship took place after that relationship ended (EDIT: in fact, this teacher was a 7th grade teacher. Since the girl was 14 when the relationship occurred, I interpret this to mean that they have not had a teacher/student relationship for 2 or maybe even 3 years).
While I understand how people can become emotional over concerns like yours, you being hot under the collar may be preventing you from understanding my position. Please don't conflate statutory rape with forceable rape simply because a group of legislaturers decided an appropriate age one can or can't make decisions about sex--they are not the same thing in my view.
I don't subscribe to the notion that laws are derived from (or reflective of) the social beliefs of a community. If you do get interested in that perspective (because a respectful group of scholars do believe it, just not my group), it's called functionalism and is embodied in the works of people like Emile Durkheim.
So, you knowing by now that I'm a conflict theorist (more in line with Karl Marx or, more accurately, Max Weber), understand that I'm more inclined to see law as a construct of those in power to retain their control over scarce resources. In this case, the sexuality of young women as well as lesbians in a patriarchal society.
P.S. I have no idea when I'll be able to leave the states. But believe me, I'm working on it as fast as I can! I'm actually hoping to start on a fullbright to get us over there before my Ph.D. is completed. Just have to figure out what I might have to offer Oz.