Reverse the sexes and tell me what you think. There is a word for the practice: “frottage”. If I were at a dance and a man ground against my leg until he got off, or tried to, I wouldn’t consider it rape, but I would consider it rude and disgusting and do everything I could to stop it including making one hell of a scene. If a man got me alone somewhere, restrained me by threat and/or violence and rubbed himself against me until he reached orgasm or something close to it, I think I would consider it rape and I’d do all I could to have him convicted of assault at the slightest. The same applies to women raping men.
Normal, run of the mill relationship? No, clearly not. I just don’t think there was any coercion involved. Adults enter into sexual relationships for bizarre reasons too, but we don’t make it illegal for screwed-up adults to have sex with each other.
If the kid had gone through puberty, which seems likely if he was able to perform sexually, then that would make the woman an ephebophile.
Forgive me if my jaw doesn’t drop in horror at the mention of the word “ephebophile” - someone who’s attracted to adolescents. Adolescents are supposed to be attractive; that’s why their bodies change to signal their sexual maturity.
I must admit that I’m not familiar with all the details of the case, but IIRC, he was a willing participant. If you call that rape, you trivialize all the real rapes.
Sure it is. Merriam-Webster defines discrimination as “prejudiced or prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment”. Treating someone differently based only on their age is analogous to treating them differently based only on their skin color or gender - they are being prejudged based on a single physical quality instead of their capabilities as an individual.
You keep stating this, but will you explain why?
Yes, I agree there are no 1 year old children who are capable of making those decisions.
But an absolute line can only be drawn if you’re willing to tolerate false positives and/or false negatives. If you draw the line at age 2, then you won’t be denying 1 year olds any rights they should have, but you’ll be giving 2 and 3 year olds a bunch of rights they shouldn’t have. I suppose I’d have a hard time calling that discrimination, but it’s still not something I’d support. My solution is to avoid drawing a line in the first place.
I suppose. The only difference I see is that the victims of age discrimination are eventually able to escape it.
No worse than any other criminal trial where you have to prove someone had certain skills or information. “Capable of making adult decisions” is a vague and mostly meaningless phrase; what’s important in a trial like this one is whether the minor in question is able to give informed consent to sex, and it’s not too hard to come up with a simple, objective definition of that.
No worse than, say, deciding whether the adult they intend to have sex with, or enter into a contract with, is mentally incapacitated (e.g. retarded or drunk) or feeling some sort of duress. Or a bartender deciding whether the person they’re about to serve another drink to is already intoxicated.
This is where a simple, objective definition of informed consent comes in - do they understand what sex is, do they know what the potential consequences are, and do they want to participate?
Now we’re getting into nitpicky details that could be asked of any law. The same question comes up with age-based laws, of course: If you meet a girl in a bar, she shows you an ID that says she’s 21, you go home with her, and you later find out the ID was fake and she’s only 16, is it enough that you believed her to be above the age limit, or are you now a “rapist” because she really wasn’t?
Personally, I’d prefer not to make the legality of a sex act depend on something the other participant can’t reasonably know.
On second thought, that may have been a little too brusque.
catsix, if either of us has a right to be offended by the trivialization of rape, it’s you, not me. What bothers me isn’t that calling consensual sex with a minor “rape” diminishes real rape, but rather that it unfairly demonizes the adult by comparing him/her to a violent criminal, and encourages people to treat the minor as a victim of some horrible experience even though the evidence shows that a willing participant is unlikely to suffer any harm.
Call me old fashioned, but I always thought the definition of “rape” included “intercourse”. IOW, it’s the act of forcing someone to have sexual intercourse against their will. At least, that’s what I remember seing in the legal definition. Otherwise, it’s “sexual assault”. I guess I need a good legal definition of “intercourse” now, but I’m doubtful it includes rubbing against or mastrubating on someone. That would be “assault”. I know, it seems hair-splitty, but when it comes to sentencing, it’s probably an important distinction. I can see a woman sexually assaulting a man easily enough. I think rape would require weaponry, restraints, and the ability on the part of the victim to maintain an erection under emotional duress. I imagine forcing some act of oral intercourse would also fall under the proper heading of “rape”.
All I can say is that you are in an extreme minority. You’re certainly welcome to your opinion, though.
On the contrary, I think it would be exceedingly hard.
Yes, the same question arises, which is why I asked you what your answer would be.
That’s exactly my point. Can you know for a fact whether a given minor is capable of “giving informed consent to sex”, as you put it? Again I ask you what sort of due diligence would be required under a law such as you have proposed. Why don’t you answer the question rather than deflecting it?
Seemed easy enough when I did it: This is where a simple, objective definition of informed consent comes in - do they understand what sex is, do they know what the potential consequences are, and do they want to participate?
Sorry if it wasn’t clear, but I did answer… the last quote in your post is my answer. If the adult reasonably believes that his partner gave informed consent, that’s enough.
Yes, of course. See my definition above, and feel free to suggest other components of informed consent if you don’t think those three questions are sufficient. (I’d elaborate on each one, but it’s late… this is my last post for the night.) The basic idea is that if someone says yes, and knows what they’re saying yes to, then that’s informed consent.
I hope you have the answer you were looking for now. If not, I guess I don’t understand what you’re asking.
I’m 44 years old. My wife is 34. Our 11th anniversary is next month. We’ve been a couple for 19 years. Do the math.
Sometimes these things are gross and manipulative. Sometimes they’re just two people in love. Damned if I know how to write laws that reflect that, though.
You know, there was a really funny bit on the Simpsons on how kids will often say “yes” when they really have no idea what they’re talking about. They had a ‘focus group’ of kids to try out ideas for a re-vamped Itchy & Scratchy show where they asked them questions:
“Okay, how many of you kids would like Itchy & Scratchy to deal with real-life problems, like the ones you face every day?”
All kids: “Yeah!”
“And who would like to see them do just the opposite - getting into far-out situations involving robots and magic powers?”
You keep saying that without explaining it. I still don’t see the difficulty in finding out whether someone understands what sex is, what it can lead to, and whether they want to take part in it. Doesn’t seem like something the average person would have trouble finding out, but I suppose some organization could print up helpful wallet-sized flowcharts for the slower folks out there.
“Uh, sure, your honor, that guy said I could have his car and his wallet.”
What does that prove? Judges and juries have to decide whose story to believe all the time, including deciding whether a defendant reasonably believed something about his actions or circumstances. As you said, this is not some wild, mystical concept.
They know whether or not they want to be somewhere or do something. If a kid tells you he wants to play football or see a movie, do you stop to wonder whether he’s really capable of making that decision?