And if she’s dating a person of the wrong race, of the wrong faith, living in the wrong part of the town, etc… some other father will use the laws on the book the very day the boyfriend will turn 18, and he will be a registered sex offender for the rest of his life.
There’s no such thing as a law on the books “just in case” . Any law that can possibly be used in a far fetched scenario will eventually be used in a far fetched scenario. And stating “that’s ludicrous in this particular situation” won’t help the slightest bit. An irate parent, a prosecutor polishing his “let’s protect the children” stance, a well-meaning neighbour, an outraged educator, a cheated on girlfriend, a doctor considering his potential liability will have the ball rolling and then nobody will be able to stop it.
And it’s particularly true for “facts only, no excuse” crimes (I don’t know the legal term for that in English) like statutory rape, even more so when there’s a minimum mandated sentence or obligation (like registering as a sex offender) things a lot of people are unfortunately very fond of.
I often wondered about this. A former coworker used to get MAX Power, a UK Car magazine. It would often have a section where the they would profile a cruise area. This usually included pictures of girls getting their bewbs out, with small profiles (Favorite footy team, favorite sexual position, favorite drink…).
Many of the girls were 16 or 17.
Grey Area? Missed by censors? Anyone?
No doubt, laws can be used to further agendas other than their purpose.
But with regard to “just in case,” take, for instance, jaywalking. It happens every day. Police have watched people jaywalk and not lifted a finger to stop it. But suppose someone jaywalks and that causes a driver to jam on his brakes, which in turn leads to an accident. I wouldn’t be surprised if the jaywalker got a ticket from the same cop who watched him do it the day before and did nothing.
Speaking as a former 18 year-old who dated a then-16 year-old, I knew that if we’d had sex, her father could have had the cops all over me. I don’t think he would have, but I also knew his daughter had no way of stopping him if he made up his mind to do so, and I didn’t even roll those dice. If he really didn’t like my race, religion, or something else, he wouldn’t have let me date her in the first place.
No doubt there are guys who are young/dumb/full of cum, and they think they’ll just sneak around behind daddy’s back, never get caught, etc. They’re playing with fire.
@Tristan: “Girls Gone Wild” took legal flak for that.
No, what it means is that I’m not a fan of wasting time and effort arguing about something that can never be resolved. Facts are facts, my experiences are my experiences, everything else is a grey area that you can argue endlessly over and never actually come to a conclusion on. I have very little interest in going back and forth with you or anyone else, and people on the SDMB are especially prone to nitpick. As you did yet again with your first paragraph. You’ve got your opinion, I’ve got mine, neither of us is likely to change the other’s opinion, and I don’t particularly care to discuss it for more than an exchange or two. We’re at that point.
Your aside about language in media is meaningless. That was due to changing cultural values. Art is a reflection of society. I strongly disagree with the idea that art actively changes society in any significant way. And it has nothing to do with the issue at hand either.
clairobscur already covered how laws can be used abusively. Statutory rape and other laws where there’s no discretion for prosecutors or law enforcement, and where in fact the wishes of the putative victim may be at odds with the law, are bad laws. The paranoia about “child porn” reminds me of the hysteria about “Satanism” in the 80s. It was overblown bullshit then and it’s bullshit now.
Ah, so you’re saying you’ve made up your mind and aren’t going to change it, regardless of any arguments others may bring up. OK. I’ve posted in threads where people asked an opinion…some agree with me, some not, and I’m sure they have their reasons. I’ll agree to disagree with you, then. If you and I were having a cup of coffee, I’d change the subject, but there are other posters in here.
A film, a standup routine, music…these are forms of art, so I don’t see how the aside is meaningless. The parallel seems valid. The trend is toward being more explicit over time. In terms of nude images (of adults), it’s the same thing:
*Pubic Wars, a pun on the Punic Wars, is the name given to the rivalry between the pornographic magazines Playboy and Penthouse during the 1960s and 1970s. Each magazine strove to show just a little bit more than the other, without crossing the “line of decency” generally accepted at the time.
In the 1950s it was generally agreed that nude photographs were not pornographic unless they showed pubic hair or, even worse, genitals. Respectable photography was careful to come close to, but not cross over, this line.*
Re: art changing society, for instance, some girls and young women look at fashion magazines and conclude that beauty depends on being rail-thin. So girls and young women starve themselves.
Or, look at groups that object to how they are portrayed in the media, fighting the perpetuation of stereotypes that have held them back.
If there’s a war, governments use propaganda to demonize an enemy:
http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~bestor/US_anti-Japanese_propaganda_files/image007.jpg
Of course, there’s a whole advertising industry researching what design to use to make the wrapper on a bar of soap most appealing to a consumer. Or they package a political candidate. They spend zillions on advertising, hoping to buy influence.
Conclusion: art can and does influence society in significant ways. That is not to say it’s as clear-cut as flipping a light switch because some individuals are more susceptible than others but P.T. Barnum was right when he said that there’s a sucker born every minute. Every time I see a piece of junk mail, I know it exists because someone out there will reply.
I would disagree that the underage girl is the only victim in all scenarios. E.g. my niece became pregnant; she and her boyfriend were unable to make the relationship work, ultimately. His parents didn’t have two nickels to rub together.
Some children in this scenario will grow up in poverty or on welfare. If her parents had also been poor, maybe she’d have had to quit high school and find work. Being young, she probably hadn’t considered how difficult it would be to finish high school (which she did), let alone go on to nursing school (which she didn’t).
Luckily her father/my brother was able to step in with money to help raise the child. The child had no father around, but at least “grandpa” was there in the formative years. It was a difficult situation but I’m sure other unwed mothers—and more importantly, the children—have it much worse. At least the stigma of being a bastard seems to have passed (?).
IANAL but I think the assumption is that parents are older, wiser, and have the best interests of their children at heart. Seeing how some kids act these days, I don’t automatically assume that all parents are spending a lot of quality time with the kids and teaching them guidelines for life but if nothing else, they’ve lived longer.
Once, when I was a kid, I threw a rock…it didn’t go where I intended and I broke a neighbor’s window. My father put in new glass for her and grounded me. Although IANAL, I assume the law holds parents responsible for the misbehavior of their (minor) children. Since the parents are responsible, they have the prerogative to limit what they allow and don’t, in child’s best interests until the child is an adult.
I don’t have a daughter, but if I had one who sexually active, I’d have some concerns:
- Some young girls are not emotionally ready for sex.
- Being inexperienced, she may not realize when that’s all the guy wants.
- I’d want to make sure it was consensual, that she wasn’t pressured into it.
- She could get a disease.
- An unplanned pregnancy could result.
- A planned pregnancy could result.*
Who picks up the pieces for any/all of this? Often, it falls squarely on the parent(s).
*Here’s a girl who’s 15, says she’s had sex 300 times, yadda, because she wants a baby. Sure, the clip is sensational, but I’ve met some girls who have decided they need a baby, someone who will love them unconditionally etc.
No, yet again you are misinterpreting what I wrote. That takes some talent considering that I write simply and clearly. I said that I don’t care enough to make the investment of time and effort to debate something that has no clear answer. We could easily discuss this for weeks and never resolve anything, but I don’t care enough to do so. I especially don’t want to have that kind of discussion with someone who has tried to put a negative spin on every single thing I’ve written.
For the rest of your post, there’s no coherent argument there. You’re throwing out several ideas out there with no support and no connection to each other. I’m not going to bother replying to this thread again since I’ve already said what I came here to say.
You posted:
*You’ve got your opinion, I’ve got mine, neither of us is likely to change the other’s opinion, and I don’t particularly care to discuss it for more than an exchange or two. *
I replied:
Ah, so you’re saying you’ve made up your mind and aren’t going to change it, regardless of any arguments others may bring up.
I wrote this with zero sarcasm or tongue-in-cheek or anything. I think wise people realize when they’re never going to agree and don’t attempt to persuade each other. For instance my sister, whom I love dearly, has polar opposite political views from mine and we’ve reached this same point—and we just agree to disagree, with no ill will. Why push it and potentially piss each other off, given that neither side will change?
Then you replied:
*No, yet again you are misinterpreting what I wrote. *
I realize that you said more than that, but my conclusion seemed reasonable, i.e. not the complete story but a big part of it.
If I’ve put a negative spin on your comments, I assure you it wasn’t intentional.
I think my remarks were relevant. You’re welcome to disagree with that appraisal.
Like you, I think I’ve said what I wanted to say (unless another doper brings up something to discuss).