Other than a mature body with all the hormones and desires that come with it, right?
Then I think if the girl in this case says she consented, or that it was her idea, your definition doesn’t fit.
I also wonder what you consider an act of sexual intercourse with a man who does not consent.
And in California, where if she changes her mind during sex but does not tell him that she has, he’s still supposedly a rapist.
Ah, a very heavily biased source from a very sexist author.
Have you ever actually tried things this way? Total mood killer. By the time all the consent questions are asked, it seems much more appealing to do taxes on a long form with only a pencil. If that’s how it’s going to be, why not draw up a contract and have both parties sign it in front of a notary?
Actually they don’t. The warning only has to be given at the time of arrest, not questioning, and if the person being questioned makes a spontaneous utterance, it’s not coercion. Things are not so black and white as you would have them.
So here’s me, jury member. I listen to both sides. I hear her maybe get on the stand and say she really did want to have sex with this guy and that she wasn’t coerced. I hear her perhaps tell the jury that she initiated things. Or I hear a lack of proof that he did coerce her, or force her in anyway. Suddenly to me it looks like a 14 year old girl and her older boyfriend making their own decision about what to do in private. So the prosecution keeps telling me that according to ‘the law’ she doesn’t know what she wants, and I remember my own experiences at 14 in which I knew exactly what I wanted and without anybody twisting my arm, I went out and did just that. I’m not convinced he deserves to go to prison and be labeled a sex offender, so I vote ‘not guilty.’
And in that instance I think the letter of the law is wrong, so I exercise my right as a juror to use a little known process called jury nullification. Course that could have all been avoided by not forcing the girl to go through with a trial.