NationStates Jolt Archive

In today's society, Men are constantly being discriminated against. By Women, who are opressing the men, and keeping them down.

See, for example

Also, just in the news...
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005...ain773196.shtml


See, if a MAN, did that, he would have been sent to jail for more then a decade, and then he would be tracked for the rest of his life, and barred from all society, and social places.

But if a WOMAN does that crime, she gest 9 months, at that's it. It's another example of the terrible opression of Men.

Hell, she had 15 counts of Sexual Battery, and 13 of Stautory Rape. For a MAN, that's about 10 years for EACH COUNT. ****ing idiotic. In today's Society, Men are being horribly opressed.

We must end this sexual discrimination.

Discuss.

pass.

We're not being "oppressed" nearly as harshly as women have in the past and still are, so I don't see as much of a problem with it. Consider it as an oscillating curve that is edging closer to the point at which everyone is treated fairly.

Women today are always undressing me with their eyes. I feel like I'm a lump of meat...an object to be possessed. Why? Why God?!

i agree. when ANYTHING about a sex crime occurs, women always get the better end of the deal. someone i know just got 35 years for being drunk and 'supposedly' touching two minors who just happened to be in a very similar situation the year before.

The link just leads to the cbsnews website. Which story is it?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/08/12/earlyshow/living/main773196.shtml

You've gotta click on it, you can't copy and paste.

The link just leads to the cbsnews website. Which story is it?
Just what I was going to ask.

Hey original poster--headlines change. You might want to take that into account when you post articles.

But because she's a Woman, she wasn't convicted that much. She could have been convicted up to 100 years, but since she was a women, she only got 9 months. This is so ****ing BS.

But because she's a Woman, she wasn't convicted that much. She could have been convicted up to 100 years, but since she was a women, she only got 9 months. This is so ****ing BS.

The reason she got such a light sentence was because she was a woman having sex with a 13-year old. What teenage boy on this planet wouldn't have consented to sex with a 28-year old woman? It wasn't like she forced herself on him like a man would with a teenage girl; it was 100% consentual, and that is why her sentence is so light.

But because she's a Woman, she wasn't convicted that much. She could have been convicted up to 100 years, but since she was a women, she only got 9 months. This is so ****ing BS.I don't see you complaining about women getting stoned for adultery or girls getting killed by their families for staining their "honor"...

http://wwwimage.cbsnews.com/images/2005/08/12/image773205x.jpg

http://img360.imageshack.us/img360/3069/hitit4gp.gif

I hate my longer sentence attracting penis.

The difference between this and most rapes is that in this case it was most likely the kid's dream come true.

The reason she got such a light sentence was because she was a woman having sex with a 13-year old. What teenage boy on this planet wouldn't have consented to sex with a 28-year old woman? It wasn't like she forced herself on him like a man would with a teenage girl; it was 100% consentual, and that is why her sentence is so light.I don't know about teenage, but in the Youth Protection Video for the Cubbies there's a scene with a female baby-sitter :p

The reason she got such a light sentence was because she was a woman having sex with a 13-year old. What teenage boy on this planet wouldn't have consented to sex with a 28-year old woman? It wasn't like she forced herself on him like a man would with a teenage girl; it was 100% consentual, and that is why her sentence is so light.

Do you actually think it'd work if a 28-year-old man and a 13-year-old girl said the sex they had was consensual? Do you actually think he'd get off light on three months worth of sexual battery and statutory rape, even if the girl said she liked it? No, he wouldn't get off light; the judge would say she'd been corrupted. Come on, now, let's be honest: women do get off lighter than men most of the time.

The reason she got such a light sentence was because she was a woman having sex with a 13-year old. What teenage boy on this planet wouldn't have consented to sex with a 28-year old woman? It wasn't like she forced herself on him like a man would with a teenage girl; it was 100% consentual, and that is why her sentence is so light.

Doesn't matter. If a girl had consented, the male would have been castrated and shot. Not really, but you get the picture, Feminazi.

Alot of this comes from the fact that people recognize history more than the present. People are afraid that people WILL bring up those past issues of women getting stoned and that the jury will get blamed, so while avoid bias they're actually being rather bias themselves. It's similar to how it's easier for a white person to be called racist than most other races. Plus, alot of jury men will go leniant on women for certain obvious reasons.

Maybe sentences for women don't need to be as long as for men. The fact that you could go to jail for a very long time is a deterant. Otherwise, I bet you'ld see a lot more older men going after teenage girls. Women, on the other hand, tend to prefer men who are older than them. It's not as big a problem with women, so you don't need such a harsh deterant. It's only the cases that involve women that make the news. Wouldn't be as interesting if it were a man.

Doesn't matter. If a girl had consented, the male would have been castrated and shot. Not really, but you get the picture, Feminazi.

I'm a man. :p

I was 13, so I know full well that any kid that age would do anything to have sex with a woman like that, so to convict them of the same severity is ridiculous.

Maybe sentences for women don't need to be as long as for men. The fact that you could go to jail for a very long time is a deterant. Otherwise, I bet you'ld see a lot more older men going after teenage girls. Women, on the other hand, tend to prefer men who are older than them. It's not as big a problem with women, so you don't need such a harsh deterant. It's only the cases that involve women that make the news. Wouldn't be as interesting if it were a man.

Even if that's true it violates equality laws.

I wouldn't mind being one of her victims. :eek:

Doesn't matter. If a girl had consented, the male would have been castrated and shot. Not really, but you get the picture, Feminazi.It's a lot harder for a woman to rape a man than vice versa.

It's a lot harder for a woman to rape a man than vice versa.
That's not true at all, you can't CONTROL an erection, it'll happen if you like it or not.

I'm a man. :p

I was 13, so I know full well that any kid that age would do anything to have sex with a woman like that, so to convict them of the same severity is ridiculous.
That slices both ways, Vetalia. I know of any number of teenaged girls who would jump at a chance to have sex with a good-looking male teacher. Yet the disparity in sentancing still exists. The presumption is that an older man somehow corrupts a young girl more than an older woman corrupts a young man. It's just how people think.

Xite']That's not true at all, you can't CONTROL an erection, it'll happen if you like it or not.
Well, you can, but it takes a degree of experience and training which teenage boys generally don't have.

But "erection imples consent" has never been an acceptable defense.

Xite']That's not true at all, you can't CONTROL an erection, it'll happen if you like it or not.That doesn't contradict my point. It's still harder for a woman to rape a man than vice versa. I didn't say impossible. I said harder.

That slices both ways, Vetalia. I know of any number of teenaged girls who would jump at a chance to have sex with a good-looking male teacher. Yet the disparity in sentancing still exists. The presumption is that an older man somehow corrupts a young girl more than an older woman corrupts a young man. It's just how people think.

True, but I've seen some incredibly horny 13 year old guys (and girls). However, there is that sexual perception; I'd still say that men deserve the longer sentence, simply because of the fact that it's easier for a man to rape a woman than vice versa,

But anyone that has sex with a minor should recieve some kind of basic sentence regardless of their own sex. It's just sick.

The reason she got such a light sentence was because she was a woman having sex with a 13-year old. What teenage boy on this planet wouldn't have consented to sex with a 28-year old woman? It wasn't like she forced herself on him like a man would with a teenage girl; it was 100% consentual, and that is why her sentence is so light.So a thirteen year old girl could never possibly want to have sex with a teacher? Not so.
This thread somehow became about how female 13 year olds are less cabable than 13 year old boys of giving sexual consent. :confused:

That doesn't contradict my point. It's still harder for a woman to rape a man than vice versa. I didn't say impossible. I said harder.

There's a certain amount of truth in that but your statement was making it sound as though its much harder, which is how I assumed most people would take it. So I decided to clear up anyone getting the wrong idea.

So a thirteen year old girl could never possibly want to have sex with a teacher? Not so.
This thread somehow became about how female 13 year olds are less cabable than 13 year old boys of giving sexual consent. :confused:

They aren't any less capable, just that men raping women is overwhelmingly more common than women raping men.

Of course the society is sexist, but the thing is that it's not irrationally sexist. Males, unlike females, have a constant sex drive which means that they are almost always ready for sexual intorcourse, and therefore will leap at the oportunity for it, and for some regardless of weather or not it is consentual on the other party or not.

Females, on the other hand, have very little sex drive most of the time, punctuated with a huge spike when they are most likely to get pregnant. (Day 14, I beleive) Now what are the odds of a female initiating nonconsentual sex with a male in that timeframe taking into acount these factors? Almost none.

Granted, if a guy were to try that he would receive a much longer sentance due cheifly to the fact that there are a great deal of men out there who could possibly want to try that, and they have to set an example. Not being a female myself, I'll say only that I've observed females to be far less sex oriented then males. (Females, if I'm wrong, feel free to shatter my ignorent illusions) Therefore, there are (in my current opinion) far fewer females out there to set an example to, and putting undue harshness on a sentance would serve little purpose.

Of course, because the society is rationally sexist, it begs the question if men are being opressed or controlled. The insurence rates for teenage males are so much higher compared to a female of the same age, but that's because teenage males almost always get into an acident before they're twenty five. So is taking into acount the frequency of occurences between contrasting genders oppresion or protection?

I really don't know or care, myself. It's a thick, gray line between them and it will innevitable lead down the path of "what do you want, freedom or safety?" So, having made my point (which will probably get disproven by a particularly smart member, or perhaps even a medium-smart one) I'll just "sit down and shut up" as they say.

In order to bring this thread back on topic, I ask why a woman getting 9 months for what seemed to be consensual sex is more deserving of criticism than a public stoning of an adultress (in countries where men will get away with it) or honor murders (in western societies)?

I'd still say that men deserve the longer sentence, simply because of the fact that it's easier for a man to rape a woman than vice versa,And in cases of rape, male and female offenders should recieve similar sentencing, just as in cases of statutory rape, all offenders should be sentenced similarily. Justice should be gender-blind. Of course a male rapist should recieve a harsher sentence than a female who had sex with a minor. It is the force involved that differentiates the two cases, not the sex of the offender.

But anyone that has sex with a minor should recieve some kind of basic sentence regardless of their own sex. It's just sick.It is considered to be wrong in our culture, but it is not necessarily "sick". Some thirteen year old girls are sexually mature. If it weren't illegal, there'd be no reason not to tap that. In the case of the female teacher in the article...
I really can't think of a single thirteen year old boy who I could be sexually attracted to.

Of course the society is sexist, but the thing is that it's not irrationally sexist. Males, unlike females, have a constant sex drive which means that they are almost always ready for sexual intorcourse, and therefore will leap at the oportunity for it, and for some regardless of weather or not it is consentual on the other party or not.

Females, on the other hand, have very little sex drive most of the time, punctuated with a huge spike when they are most likely to get pregnant. (Day 14, I beleive) Now what are the odds of a female initiating nonconsentual sex with a male in that timeframe taking into acount these factors? Almost none.
This must apparently only be true of women around hella old, because I have had women threaten to rape me, damn

i agree. when ANYTHING about a sex crime occurs, women always get the better end of the deal. someone i know just got 35 years for being drunk and 'supposedly' touching two minors who just happened to be in a very similar situation the year before.
It is not true that when anything about a sex crime occurs women always get the better end of the deal. Most victims of sex crimes are women or children, and I suggest the majority of sex crimes go unpunished.

As for this particular the fact is many law enforcement agencies regularily refuse to prosecute statutory rape where the victim was not overtly coerced (ie through physical intimidation or force). Personally I find that very distasteful regardless of the gender/sex of those involved, but it appears to be a very commonplace trend.

As for those suggesting the victim would have enjoyed it, etc, that is not the point, his parents are also victims here, and I do not believe that it is not possible for the victim to regret the events, and to be greatly harmed by them. 13 years should not be placed in such a position by any adult, it is a violation of trust and such crimes should be taken more seriously without regard for gender/sex.

They aren't any less capable, just that men raping women is overwhelmingly more common than women raping men.So therefore men should get harsher sentences?

So therefore men should get harsher sentences?

Not for rape, but when there is debate over whether or not a sexual act was consentual. All rape should be punished equally, of course.

The reason she got such a light sentence was because she was a woman having sex with a 13-year old. What teenage boy on this planet wouldn't have consented to sex with a 28-year old woman? It wasn't like she forced herself on him like a man would with a teenage girl; it was 100% consentual, and that is why her sentence is so light.At least in Canada, a person under the age of 18 cannot consent to sex.

At least in Canada, a person under the age of 18 cannot consent to sex.

That's a little odd...does that apply to two people under 18 or just when one partner is under 18?

At least in Canada, a person under the age of 18 cannot consent to sex.That's silly. It's 14 in Germany because that's the transition age from childhood to youthhood. You also can't be convicted of a crime before you're 14.

Females, on the other hand, have very little sex drive most of the timeCould you explain that to my sex drive, please? She totally rules me, and it's a real pain in the ass.
Seriously, we do want sex, just as much as guys do. There is also a social stigma against women who express their sexual desires. We want it, we just keep it to ourselves. It's possible that we are more practised in exercising self-control.

Could you explain that to my sex drive, please? She totally rules me, and it's a real pain in the ass.
Seriously, we do want sex, just as much as guys do. There is also a social stigma against women who express their sexual desires. We want it, we just keep it to ourselves. It's possible that we are more practised in exercising self-control.

There is a shortage of girls like you in my town. Sigh.

The reason she got such a light sentence was because she was a woman having sex with a 13-year old. What teenage boy on this planet wouldn't have consented to sex with a 28-year old woman? It wasn't like she forced herself on him like a man would with a teenage girl; it was 100% consentual, and that is why her sentence is so light.

i'm 14, and i would say yes. :fluffle: but that's beside the point. men are jailed for sex that was consented to by both sides. :D bottom line, if a male teacher seduced and, with the consent of both, had sex with a 13 yr old feamle student :eek: , he would get more than nine months :mp5:

it just aint right :(

Females, on the other hand, have very little sex drive most of the time, punctuated with a huge spike when they are most likely to get pregnant.
And how long have you been a source of totally inaccurate and misleading information? Hmmm?

At least in Canada, a person under the age of 18 cannot consent to sex.No. The age of consent is 14.
Canada and Hawaii. Where it's at.

There is a shortage of girls like you in my town. Sigh.Like I said, we keep our sexual desires to ourselves for fear of social censure (well, most women do, I don't care what other people think). There are girls "like me" in your town. You probably know them as sluts.
That's social censure for you.

In today's society, Men are constantly being discriminated against. By Women, who are opressing the men, and keeping them down.

See, for example

Also, just in the news...
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005...ain773196.shtml


See, if a MAN, did that, he would have been sent to jail for more then a decade, and then he would be tracked for the rest of his life, and barred from all society, and social places.

But if a WOMAN does that crime, she gest 9 months, at that's it. It's another example of the terrible opression of Men.

Hell, she had 15 counts of Sexual Battery, and 13 of Stautory Rape. For a MAN, that's about 10 years for EACH COUNT. ****ing idiotic. In today's Society, Men are being horribly opressed.

We must end this sexual discrimination.

Discuss.
Shut up and get me a beer biotch! (JK)

Yeah, I hate feminist :sniper:
And I'm a girl? ha...
I think they have taken most issues way 'over the line'. There are still many situations in (American) society where a woman is mistreated (in comparison to a male), I will agree with that. Though by being so fanatical most of feminist will never fix anything and completely trash the reputation of any female seeking (truly equal) equality.
I can only hope that everything will even out eventually... while writing this I have conjured up an idea... if males start supporting reasonable veiws of feminist, then perhaps the leveling out will go more smoothly... not saying they should completely submit to man-bashing female rule, only the issues that will help acheive actualy equality.

Having sex with a 13 year old boy is gross, she should be put in for more time, any guy would... then again, if she had been a man I highly doubt that there would be as much publicity; that in itself is a form of punishment... but again only due to the double standards.

side note- What is this about females not having as much sex drive? har har, thats just silly :rolleyes:

Like I said, we keep our sexual desires to ourselves for fear of social censure (well, most women do, I don't care what other people think). There are girls "like me" in your town. You probably know them as sluts.
That's social censure for you.

Hmmmph, I don't label them as sluts. Kinda judgemental of you to assume I did. Having endured long stretches of unintentional celibacy and enjoyed a 5-some among other adventures, I find myself to be neither a prude nor oversexed (if there is such a thing...the sex is rarely the problem, but the attitude can be.)

In other words, I'd prefer if you pointed something else besides fingers my way. :D

I'd just like to point out that feminism is about gender equality, not superiority. There was one site that defined that as extreme feminism or something similar.

Technically it's not really discrimination unless you give us a bunch of similar cases, where only the gender of the rapist changes. And you'd have to have different judges as well.

Check the rulings, and if women DO recieve shorter sentances, then that's worth a bit of protest.

If you want gender discrimination, in Hong Kong a girl can legally have sex at 16. A boy at 18. Heh.

Hmmmph, I don't label them as sluts. Kinda judgemental of you to assume I did. Having endured long stretches of unintentional celibacy and enjoyed a 5-some among other adventures, I find myself to be neither a prude nor oversexed (if there is such a thing...the sex is rarely the problem, but the attitude can be.)

In other words, I'd prefer if you pointed something else besides fingers my way. :DI never said that you called them sluts. That is probably one of the only ways to which other people in your town will refer to the women I speak of. You will know them as sluts.

A 5-some?
>best "Joey" voice< How you doin'?

If you want gender discrimination, in Hong Kong a girl can legally have sex at 16. A boy at 18. Heh.It makes sense. Women mature at a younger age then guys, on average. Many sixteen year old girls look like adults, whereas most boys at that age look like children.

Women today are always undressing me with their eyes. I feel like I'm a lump of meat...an object to be possessed. Why? Why God?!

Want to trade places?

I never said that you called them sluts. That is probably one of the only ways to which other people in your town will refer to the women I speak of. You will know them as sluts.

A 5-some?
>best "Joey" voice< How you doin'?

[puts finger in mouth coquettishly]

[puts finger in mouth coquettishly]That's hot.

I have a question for those who believe a 28 year old woman molesting a 13 year old boy should get off easy because the boy is always horny and "consents." What if it was a 28 y.o. man and an always horny and "consenting" 13 y.o. boy? Should the man get off easy in this case too since the boy was into it? How about a 28 y.o. woman and a 13 y.o. girl for that matter?

Of course not. And neither should the woman in question. Male or female you can't consent at 13. *ANY* sexual contact between an adult and child regaurdless of the sex of either is child abuse/molestation and should be punished harshly. The whole "the boy just got what he wanted" justification is no better than the "she asked for it" justification of rape.

bump

At least in Canada, a person under the age of 18 cannot consent to sex.


That was never the case in recent years. Until a few years ago, if one partner was under the age of 18 (minimum was 14), the other couldn't be more than 3 years older than they were. Now it's effectively 14. No contest, under 14 is Statutory Rape. Under 18 cases will generally be quickly dismissed unless the adult is over the age of 30.

I was updated on the current state of affairs when one of my best friends (29) ended up dating a 17-year-old.

It makes sense. Women mature at a younger age then guys, on average. Many sixteen year old girls look like adults, whereas most boys at that age look like children.

You want to go by physical appearance? Women reach puberty faster. Men still beat them by a decade on sexual peak. As far as mental maturity, no scale to measure it has ever been devised. The biggest difference between the two is the level of expression. The immaturity of teenage boys is quite expressive and obvious; have an in-depth conversation with an average middle-teen girl and you'll see they're really not that far apart.

As for sixteen year old girls looking like adults, are we talking 18 with the application of makeup? Girls at that age often groom themselves to *try* to look older. Boys toss on a shirt, pants, and grab their keys.

Iron my shirt, Bitch!

Iron my shirt, Bitch!
"Cook the man some eggs... ";)

or is that reference getting a little on the obscure side? :confused:

"Cook the man some eggs... ";)

or is that reference getting a little on the obscure side? :confused:

were you once a warrior?

"Cook the man some eggs... ";)

or is that reference getting a little on the obscure side? :confused:

Not for those of us who did see once were warriors. Hmm.
BTW, "You're not in Guatelmala now, Dr. Ropata."

Only once Gartef... ;)
Not for those of us who did see once were warriors. Hmm.
BTW, "You're not in Guatelmala now, Dr. Ropata."
^I wasnt sure how many would have on an international forum...

Back on topic...
For those who have seen the film, did they approve of Jake's preferred manner of dealing with child-abusers (as opposed to involving law enforcement), if so is that for female abusers as well, or only males?

Did anyone else notice that the reason her sentence was so light was that the state offered her a plea bargain that stipulated she couldn't profit in any way from her story? That's an enormous point. The other famous stories like this one (the woman from New Hampshire who had her husband killed and the woman from Washington with the 6th grader; I'm too lazy to look up their names) both made boatloads of cash by selling their story after they were done serving their time. The prosecution considered that more important than her serving time because the boy wouldn't make a dime from the case.

Seriously, anyone dense enough to think that the result of this case alone shows some wild anti-male bias in our judicial system needs to just go away. This case does not mean that all men are oppressed or that there is a double standard in our laws. Men are not oppressed; get over it.

The reason she got such a light sentence was because she was a woman having sex with a 13-year old. What teenage boy on this planet wouldn't have consented to sex with a 28-year old woman? It wasn't like she forced herself on him like a man would with a teenage girl; it was 100% consentual, and that is why her sentence is so light.

That’s ridiculous. A 13-year-old can’t consent. There is no way a 13-year-old can navigate a sexual relationship with a 28-year-old as an equal. He’s a child; she’s an adult. You statement is just a new twist on the rape myth: ‘the woman really wanted it; she will enjoy it; afterwards she will like the sex and be fine.’ You’re statement has taken all the old arguments and turned them on a child just because he is male.

That woman deserves to spend the next 50 years in jail. She coned a child into sex. That’s rape. And, for the record, plenty of grown men con little girls into sex. Our society rightly calls that statutory rape. It should have looked at this case the same way. My guess is there was more at work than sexism. The woman was very attractive. If she was ugly I bet she would have got more years.
:mad: :mad:

That’s ridiculous. A 13-year-old can’t consent. There is no way a 13-year-old can navigate a sexual relationship with a 28-year-old as an equal. He’s a child; she’s an adult. You statement is just a new twist on the rape myth: ‘the woman really wanted it; she will enjoy it; afterwards she will like the sex and be fine.’ You’re statement has taken all the old arguments and turned them on a child just because he is male.

That woman deserves to spend the next 50 years in jail. She coned a child into sex. That’s rape. And, for the record, plenty of grown men con little girls into sex. Our society rightly calls that statutory rape. It should have looked at this case the same way. My guess is there was more at work than sexism. The woman was very attractive. If she was ugly I bet she would have got more years.
:mad: :mad:

Plea. Bargain.

Seriously, this is what the family wanted. Can't anyone else read the damn story?

I'm ignoring a lot of what is in this thread. I don't think men are discriminated against. But I do think what women have fought for, for years isn't really open to men as well. I'll give an example, just recently a swimming pool had to allow Womens only session open to men...because they might have legal action against them. Now years back women were fighting to get in all sort of elitest male clubs...because.

All of a sudden a male wants to get into a swimming club and it is a problem. Personally I don't care about a womens swimming club but i'm surprised by womens reactions, wanting to keep men out. If we all seem to want equality we shoul be able to mix freely.

There is also a hotel in London which is women only...down to the staff. Now would it fair to say that if such a thing existed in london for men only it would be the centre of attention? I think so. However the hotel is for women to relax because having men around is a problem, women apparently like to relax and can't do it with men around.

Personally I don't see the difference between this and men having their own club to escape women...

Seems that we still have a long way to go on the road to equality.

14? 16? 18? I wonder if anyone asked Mother Nature about this.

It would seem to me that teenagers are programmed by a 'higher power' to seek to reproduce like rabbits. The problem is obviously that their families and society in general cannot (or are unwilling to) bear the burden of parenthood for those unable to work or ill-prepared to assume their role in society as adults. I cannot find fault with teenagers 'practicing' on each other, but an adult who has sex with a teenager (maybe 18 or under) should be punished severely since he/she has demonstrated gross and irremediable bad taste.

The gender equality issue is another thing entirely. When I read a news item about male sexual slavery (e. g. 30 men - some as young as 15 - held prisoner in a trailer and forced to service as many as 20 women each night), then I might begin to believe that gender equality is here! Until then, society in general protects men far better than it protects women, and protects adults far better than it protects children.

Females, on the other hand, have very little sex drive most of the time

Obviously this is based on your own personal observation. Also obvious is that your presence is contaminating the observed results.

snip should be punished severely since he/she has demonstrated gross and irremediable bad taste.

snip.

If 'bad taste' were punishable by law then the executives from most TV shows would be serving life sentences.

regardless o sexism in sentencing (Personally I do think sentencing should be relevant to the crime commited rather than gender) why on earth would a 28 year old woman want to have sex with a 13 yearold boy? She must have somthing going seriously wrong upstairs!

I understand the current sexism in the legal system dealing with older male/older female statuatory rape -- that doesn't make it right. Any type of statuatory rape is statuatory rape, pure and simple, in my opinion. Doesn't matter how easy or hard it was for the offender (how is the "it's harder for women" argument even close to valid?), it's still the same crime. However, I think a lot of people are confused as to why men are more often thought of as corrupt sex offenders. The great majority of sex offenders are men, and, from what I've heard and read, not for sexual reasons. A large amount of male rapists attack their victims for a feeling in control, of power; rape is most often classified as a violent crime, not a sexual one. Since the male of the species typically has the "predator" instinct, most rapists are male, and therefore, are stereotyped as being automatically at fault and entirely guilty in cases of violation in sexuality laws. Since women aren't usually thought of as rapists, let alone serial killers, muggers, etc., they are not often viewed in such an ill-favored light, and get easier sentences.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/08/12/earlyshow/living/main773196.shtml

You've gotta click on it, you can't copy and paste.
Damn, she's hot. That kid was lucky.

Did anyone else notice that the reason her sentence was so light was that the state offered her a plea bargain that stipulated she couldn't profit in any way from her story? That's an enormous point.

Yeah, it looks like she could have gone to jail for a very long time. She had what, over 15 counts? I think the fact that the family wanted the plea deal says a lot. They didn't want to go to trial.

I don't know that this is the right case to argue for discrimination against men. This is a case with some extenuating circumstances that cloud the judgement against her. I'm not saying that discrimination against men doesn't happen; I just don't think this is the best case to illustrate it.

The case here in Washington(Mary Kay LeTourneau sp?) I think was pretty unfair. If it had been an older man getting a younger girl pregnant, I think they would have thrown him in jail and never let him see the light of day again. However, those two did just get married so go figure.

A thought: perhaps men are sentenced more harshly because the sex act implies an act of aggression on the man's part, and an act of submission on the female's part? Just throwing something out there for the debate.

You want to go by physical appearance? Women reach puberty faster. Men still beat them by a decade on sexual peak.I don't know where to start. Here (http://www.mypleasure.com/education/qanda/questions/49.asp). "It really all comes down to how you define "sexual peak." If it is measured by hormone levels, or ease of getting physically aroused, then both men and women peak in their late teens to early 20s. If it is measured by sexual satisfaction, it comes later in life [for women]."
"Because of societal messages, women often take longer to feel comfortable with sexuality or learn about their bodies. Many women don't learn how to have an orgasm until later in life."


As for sixteen year old girls looking like adults, are we talking 18 with the application of makeup? Girls at that age often groom themselves to *try* to look older. Boys toss on a shirt, pants, and grab their keys.As a seventeen year old girl, who has been mistaken for mid-twenties since she was thirteen or fourteen, and does not wear any make-up at all, I'd have to disagree.

That was never the case in recent years. Until a few years ago, if one partner was under the age of 18 (minimum was 14), the other couldn't be more than 3 years older than they were. Now it's effectively 14. No contest, under 14 is Statutory Rape. Under 18 cases will generally be quickly dismissed unless the adult is over the age of 30.

I was updated on the current state of affairs when one of my best friends (29) ended up dating a 17-year-old.What province do you live in? To the best of my knowledge, 14 is still the age of consent, in Ontario, at least.

http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/library/PRBpubs/prb993-e.htm
"The Criminal Code does not now criminalize consensual sexual activity with or between persons 14 or over, unless it takes place in a relationship of trust or dependency, in which case sexual activity with persons over 14 but under 18 can constitute an offence, notwithstanding their consent. Even consensual activity with those under 14 but over 12 may not be an offence if the accused is under 16 and less than two years older than the complainant. The exception, of course, is anal intercourse, to which unmarried persons under 18 cannot legally consent, although both the Ontario Court of Appeal(3) and the Quebec Court of Appeal(4) have struck down the relevant section of the Criminal Code."

As a seventeen year old girl, who has been mistaken for mid-twenties since she was thirteen or fourteen, and does not wear any make-up at all, I'd have to disagree.[/QUOTE]

I'm mistaken for a College Student when I was 12 years old. Now that I'm older, they're like "Oh, have you graduated yet?" D:

Did anyone else notice that the reason her sentence was so light was that the state offered her a plea bargain that stipulated she couldn't profit in any way from her story? That's an enormous point. The other famous stories like this one (the woman from New Hampshire who had her husband killed and the woman from Washington with the 6th grader; I'm too lazy to look up their names) both made boatloads of cash by selling their story after they were done serving their time. The prosecution considered that more important than her serving time because the boy wouldn't make a dime from the case.

Seriously, anyone dense enough to think that the result of this case alone shows some wild anti-male bias in our judicial system needs to just go away. This case does not mean that all men are oppressed or that there is a double standard in our laws. Men are not oppressed; get over it.

THANK YOU for pointing that out. After reading 4 and a half pages of this argument, I kept wondering, "How many of these people have actually read the entire two pages of the bleeding article??!!" Grand total is, apparently, 2.

I don't know that this is the right case to argue for discrimination against men. This is a case with some extenuating circumstances that cloud the judgement against her. I'm not saying that discrimination against men doesn't happen; I just don't think this is the best case to illustrate it.


I'm sorry. 3 people have read the entire article.