That is exactly the idea behind statutory rape to begin with–a physical and mental power differential. But Romeo and Juliet laws are based on the exception where there might be non-coercive love involved.
It’s surely not just the idea that both parties lack consent. For instance, in my state, there’s no statutory rape unless one party is over the age of eighteen–even though the age of consent is sixteen, meaning that a sixteen year old has consent but a fifteen year old does not
Myself, I’d prefer to see an affirmative defense that the relationship was non-coercive and/or in the younger partner’s (and child’s if there is one involved) best interest(s) myself, regardless of age, because age limits are arbitrary.
I once handled a case where a young girl was extremely provocative and sexually acting out. She had numerous partners, and some were age appropriate (she was fourteen) but one was not at twenty-two. I was surprised that the parents of the girl supported the relationship with the 22 year old, which the state was condemning and prosecuting him for. At first I thought it was a mentally ill girl with perhaps not so mentally sound parents either, but they explained to me the situation and I wound up not being able to help agreeing.
The parents had known the 22 year old a long time and he was a good solid young man with a decent job and college educated. He had known the girl since infancy and in fact had always been a friend of the family. The parents were worried that their daughter would get pregnant from one of the younger irresponsible boys. They had allowed the girl contraceptives–condoms and the pill–but she wasn’t using them and maybe she intended to get pregnant. The parents were well read on the psychology involved and explained they thought their daughter sought to validate herself by becoming a mother. Of course they were against it, but they weren’t going to stick their heads in the sand and ignore reality that the girl was going to find a way and there was little they could do.
And the girl wanted to marry the 22 year old and not any of the boys more her age. She was the one with the idea–the guy had resisted her advances for two years. Therefore, the parents supported the marriage, but the state prosecuted first. They made me cry and I had to agree–that particularly relationship was not coercive even though it did have to do with the girl’s immaturity. It was the 22 year old’s parents that turned him in because they were against it.
I couldn’t help but agree that it made no sense to forbid the relationship where there was enough responsibility to raise a child to turn the girl toward more irresponsible procreation.
Life presents a lot of complex situations where the pat answers just don’t cut it.
At this point, and not just in response to your post, Captain Amazing, but all the others also mentioning “Romeo and Juliet laws” that they come in a wide variety, but they are all designed to lessen or eliminate criminal culpability where coercion is likely to not be involved.
This article notes Romeo and Juliet laws:
It left out the type of law my state has–the elimination of statutory rape where the older partner is over the age of eighteen (which ordinarily invokes statutory rape) but is within five years of age of the perceived victim. Thus a guy gets a possible pass till age twenty,