Oh, I agree the guy was stupid. But that doesn’t change anything.
I find it odd that nobody has even mentioned the old, traditional American response to situations of this type, i.e.–swift & blinding violence.
Traditionally, the male relative gathers 4 to 6 good friends & either a thick stick or (in the South) a horsewhip. They arrive late at night, & reduce the offender to pudding.
I am not advocating that, in this instance. I am not advocating violence of any kind.
But I am puzzled by the societal change. It was once the only response any male relative would have thought of.
Did the OP consider it?
Did other posters consider it?
Keep in mind astro your perspective is different from mine. You weren’t there, in my head while I lost my virginity. Males and females alike, need to be taught a fundemental respect for their potential lovers. No, means no, and attempts to “change” such an answer should not be made. Once that “no” is uttered, than that should be the end of it. This society, is so twisted, because not only is sex somehow wrong and shameful, but a person’s “no” on such a matter isn’t given it’s full weight all too often. (There are some “exceptions” to this, read on.) That’s a bad combination.
You still didn’t apologize either. You are still puffed up, defending your precarious stance, instead of saying somehing like “I can see you were hurt, and since you were there, and I wasn’t, then I’ll take your word for it. I’m sorry I wronged you.” That is what I’m asking for from you. You have wronged me, by sneering at, trivializing, and calling “absurd” (even now) my date rape experience.
You weren’t there, you haven’t felt forced. (However that pressure was applied to me, it was a form of force.) I have been, both date raped, and violently raped. I felt simiarly resentful, hurt, frightened (he didn’t use a condom my first time) and angry BOTH times, but I had physical pain, and more of the anger and self blame with the violent rape.
What are the feelings of other posters on the validity of date rape, as defined by that site? Is it very far off base, right on target, or somewhere in between? I realize, each case is different, and that the site generalizes, but what I’m asking is “If a guy continues pressuring a female he knows to give him sex after she has said no, and he gets sex out of her, is it a form of rape?” I’d say, depending on the kind of pressure, and the variants of the situation etc. that there’s a good chance that it is. I say that extreme emotional pressure can still constitute rape, depending on the situation, and how the person who was “persuaded” felt about it.
I realize sometimes a couple who knows each other well may have different experiences with this (though marital rape can also occur) in that the woman may MEAN “Seduce me, convince me I want sex” but say something like “Not tonight, I have a headache.” I’d say, that the woman’s reactions after her lover tries to persuade her should be used to gauge whether he should take “no” as her answer or not. Though, also I’d say that females need to be clear with their lovers (some males too) and let them know, that when they say “No”, they mean just that, and not to try any further.
I’d say an open dialog is important, on both sides, and respect also. Learning to communicate effectively so that both partners know what is going on is very important. It can be very tricky territory, when the people involved know each other, but IN GENERAL, “No, means No!”.
If there is confusion, than a frank open discussion should be held at a later time, so that there is full comprehension, and respect. Each situation is unique, and sometimes a guy isn’t raping his partner if he persists after she’s “apparently” said no. Only sometimes though. It depends on if the person who’s been asked, honestly feels pressured into agreeing to it. If not, than it isn’t. If so, than it’s rape.
In my case, it was rape, because even though I did love the guy, I wasn’t ready, I said no, I continued to say no, and felt pressured into “doing it”. I didn’t actually say yes, but I acquiesced physically after asking if he’d leave me alone if I did? I later learned, that you don’t have to have sex if you are in love, the boyfriend I had before the guy who was over a decade older than I was didn’t have sex with me, and I truly cared about him.
I find it odd that nobody has even mentioned the old, traditional American response to situations of this type, i.e.–swift & blinding violence.
Traditionally, the male relative gathers 4 to 6 good friends & either a thick stick or (in the South) a horsewhip. They arrive late at night, & reduce the offender to pudding.
I am not advocating that, in this instance. I am not advocating violence of any kind.
But I am puzzled by the societal change. It was once the only response any male relative would have thought of.
Did the OP consider it?
Did other posters consider it?
You want me to apologize for pointing out to you that what you are calling “rape” in the context of you losing your virginity is not generally considered to be rape by sensible people?
Your feelings are your feelings and it’s not my job or place to validate them. You described the specific situation of you losing your virginity in considerable detail, and seemed surprised that I won’t characterize that scenario as “rape”, but rather describe it as fairly typical obnoxious and manipulative adolescent behavior on the part of your 16 year old boyfriend that you could have walked away from.
You have not been “wronged”. You are aggravated that the situation you have described does not in any way entitle you to call yourself “raped” in a real world contextual sense outside your counselor’s office, relative to the scenario you described.
Yes, reading through the first page you will see some examples of violent suggestions.
Some of you seem to be climbing all over this slippery slope by suggesting that this girl was old enough to make this decision, that the Mom should handle it herself, that the guy is fairly innocent, etc. We have this age of consent law for a reason. Instances like this shouldnt have to be considered on a case by case basis. The law is clear and we as a society have decided that we dont want our 14 year olds getting knocked up by 21 year olds.
What if she was 13 and he was 21, or if she was 14 and the guy was 30? Were do you draw the line?
If your convinced that the situation is reasonable then let it go in front of the courts. Let the daughter explain to the judge how things happened, let her state the case for the guy getting off with a slap on the wrist.
Then let the Mom tell the judge how much she likes the guy and how she doesnt feel that it was any big deal. Then let the guy get on the stand and proclaim his love for the girl. Let him tell the judge what happened and why he shouldnt go to jail for it.
Let the judge/jury be the entity that determines the future of this situation, if youre convinced it wasnt such a bad thing.
Fourteen year olds come in all sorts of packages. Some devoloped mentally some not, some developed physically some not, some a combo of both. I think this is why the law chose this age to be applicable to the age of consent. The onset of hormonal changes and the peer pressure from the guys and gals at that age can be an insurmountable challenge when trying to make a decision like this. Especially when the other party (the guy) has already climbed over that hill and has more of his faculties about him. He gets the blame, not the girl.
If it does go to court, they can`t release the name of the girl anyway. She should remain anonymous.
Some states still have the death penalty for statutory rape. Tennessee raised the age from 12 to 14.
It’s certainly a valid question. I think the honest answer is that every case in different. Some teens are very mature at the age of 13 and some are still terribly immature at the age of 18. As parents can use some latitude in what we allow our children to do based on how much we trust our kids. That’s because we don’t have to worry about the constitution when we make our rules. Legislators have no such luxury. Were they to vote for a law that used “degree of maturity” as a yardstick in re to statutory privileges such as drinking, sex, voting, and driving, it would be immediately struck down as unconstitutional. That doesn’t mean that “degree of maturity” isn’t the best, and most appropriate gauge, it just means that linear age is the best measure we can legislate.
So, once again, I’d say the niece and her mother are the best people to determine where to draw the line and what action to take.
Convict, that was completely out of line and tasteless. Don’t be a jerk.
Lynn
For the Straight Dope
No, Mr2001 the rational government purpose behind age of consent laws os to prevent the exploitation of minors by sexual predators. That is certainly enought o survive rational basis analysis, and in all likelihood a higher level of scrutiny (can’t think of a case where strict scrutiny would be triggered by a law in this area where the evidence would exist to jstify the restriction). There is no rational government purpose behind defining a car as a cow to alter the level of punishment received.
You might be interested to know, though probably not because it doesn’t fit in with your particular world view, that I actually oppose such measures as Megan’s Laws and the placement of sex offenders in post-incarceration as being unconstitutional. Iam in favor of bringing a degree of rationality to the law concerning sexual matters. One way this has been done is by writing rape out of the statute books in some states - everything is defined as sexual assault of varying grades. Another way, is to view all sex without the consent of the victim as being rape. Of course there are different levels of rape, and the offenses are punishable differently, but rape is rape.
Now I would accept there is legitimate room for discussion as to when we should view an individual as capable of granting consent. I think 14 is too low. Especially given your repeated views, which I share, that the American societal attitude toward sex has resulted in a total lack of meaningful sex education (my apologies if this misrepresents your view). If you want 14 year olds to be allowed to consent, that I would suggest a sensible first step would be an educational one.
And yes, I do know other countries have lower ages of consent and lower teen pregnancy rates. Might you not recognize there is a direction of causation issue in your argument? Were American teens better educated about sex, and better able to handle the consequences, then there would be a stornger argument for lowerign the age of consent. It’s not there to prevent teen pregnancy anyway, or really to stop teens sleeping with each other. It exists to protect teens from predators. And look at what you have here. You have a 21 year old (the age I graduated college) having sex with a 14 year old (I assume a high school freshman). This isn’t a close call of an 18 year old dating a 17 year old. If any of my college class had turned up to a summer ball with a 14 year old in tow and told me they were going to have sex later, I would have had no qualms about doing whatever I could to stop them, however much the child claimed she was in love with him.
Absolutely NOT.
What if the Mom is one of more of the following;
a drug user,
a delinquent,
has a warrant out for her arrest,
couldnt care less, the 21 year old is Moms boyfriend,
Mom got paid off,
Mom got threatened,
etc.
Not to mention we would have to set up an evaluation process to determine if every girl is mature enough ‘emotionally and physically’. Who gets to decide?
Too many situations to sort through and too many variables.
I`ll give you, at best, a social worker who could make the call. Not the parents. Not with something of this magnitude.
Just had a chance to talk with my sister. They have been out of town for the weekend.
Evidently the girl is not pregnant. That is if OTC pregnancy tests are to be trusted. A visit to the doc is upcoming to make sure.
Sis says all the girl does is mope around all day. She blames her parents for ruining the relationship with “the only man I’ll ever love”. Kinda lends credence to some of the posters that stated earlier that to a young girl SEX=LOVE?
The school has been made aware that there is a problem with a certain young man and have been advised to contact police if he shows up at the school.
The girl has stated that she will run away if the boy gets in trouble in any way. My sister believes her and or now no charges will be pressed, unless she or he tries to continue the relationship.
Looks like a LOT of counselling is in the near future.
Thanks for all the replies as we got good information from BOTH sides of the coin.
I have the same problem with item 2:
Date Rape can be coerced both physically and emotionally - some emotional tactics include; threats to reputation, threats to “not like you”, name calling, saying you “brought it on” or “really want it”, threats to break up and threats to say you “did it” even if you didn’t.
There’s such a thing as emotional coercion, but threatening to “not like you” or to break up ain’t it. It’s like threatening a store owner that you won’t come back to his shop unless he gives you some free stuff. If he says no at first, but gives in after enough pestering, that doesn’t make you a thief (though it might make you a jerk).
I say emotional coercion can constitute rape, but there’s a line between pressure and coercion. “You’ll do this if you love me” is pressure; “you’ll do this if you want to keep your job” is coercion. “I’ll tell your friends” is pressure; “I’ll tell the police” is coercion.
If that were the purpose, then the definition of “consent” and “rape” wouldn’t need to be changed - they could just pass a new law saying anyone over age X who has sex with someone under age Y is guilty of e.g. “Sexual Contact With A Minor”. In fact, many states do just that.
What I meant is that the purpose of calling cars “cows” would be the same as calling the act in the OP “statutory rape”, or calling a 14 year old girl who is willing to have sex “nonconsenting” - it’s a political tool that lets you demonize the criminal by comparing him to someone who committed a different crime. If there isn’t enough support for giving long sentences to people who have Sexual Contact With A Minor, you just have to tweak the definitions a little, and now you can pound the table about how all these (statutory) RAPISTS need to be kept off the streets.
Not necessarily the level of punishment received, but rather the public perception. The choice of words makes it harder to consider whether the facts of the case merit the punishment; no one wants to be seen as defending “rape”.
We are in total agreement here.
You have a point, but I think causation also works the other way: some people don’t see a need to teach 14 year olds about sex, because according to the law, they shouldn’t be having sex for another few years.
Well, that’s your choice. The guy in the OP sounds like a desperate loser, but I don’t see anything to suggest he’s a “predator”. Predators’ victims don’t sneak out at night to go get preyed upon.
Talking about sex is fun. Having someone ask you ‘Can I put my hand on your breast now?’ or ‘Can I penetrate you now?’ every step of the way, no matter what terms you put it in, is an instant buzz kill.
There’s no need to ask if you automatically put one on, or if you’re the woman you automatically hand him one.
Really? I definitely think there needs to be an element of force, or we’ll end up with a bunch of really stupid prosecutions in which ‘I didn’t think he’d like me if I didn’t have sex with him’ makes the guy some evil sexual predator whose life is now over.
I think two fairly random people in this thread alone who have already said they’d vote not guilty if the facts at hand were those presented in evidence is a good indication that you’d get a hung jury.
Unless he kidnapped you, I have to wonder why you went anywhere with him when you knew full well that it was going to get sexual.
If that’s an example of ‘date rape’, then ‘date rape’ has become a very trivialized idea.
How was the choice to say ‘OK, I don’t love you. I’m going home.’ removed from you? Or the choice to say ‘I don’t want to see you again’ removed from you?
You seem to have continually chosen to go with him to places where it was dark and you’d be alone with him knowing what he wanted when you got there.
I can’t say that it’s surprising at all to hear that you found out from a counselor at a battered women’s shelter that all your problems started with a guy.
Manipulative? Maybe. Rape? No way in hell. You still had the choice to say no and leave, and to stop seeing him. You exercised the other choice.
So when you say ‘No’, why hang around in a situation where you know stuff that you don’t want to happen has just happened and could continue? Why not say no and walk away?
Items 2 and 8 are definite bullshit, and 10 is meaningless without context. If you wish to be understood, it is your duty to make sure that you are. Want ‘No’ to be taken seriously? Say it, and then leave the area.
And yet you continued to go out with him, to go into situations where from past experience you knew how things would progress. If you really didn’t want to have sex with him, why did you not make yourself understood in your ‘No means no’ by ceasing all situations where he’d even try?
Is it out of line and tasteless if Convict is fifteen? (I have no idea how old he is, but just wondering.)
And yet I have told you that is not the standard of affirmative consent I support. Nor have I seen other people support it in the research I have done on the matter. The closest I have seen to it is the Antioch College Policy that was so ridiculed in the popular press (yet is highly supported it seems by the students governed by it, according to reports I’ve read). But that wasn’t a law, and was never intended to be one. I’m not suggesting you need to have a check list. I am suggesting in a one night stand situation it is not an infringement of your macho stud rights to require that you ask permission before having sex with someone, or else face the burden of having to demonstrate that there was consent shown sufficient for a reasonable person to determine that the other party was consenting. And if they are too drunk to really know what they are doing, then back off. Look at it this way, if you aren’t sure, then don’t do it. Sure you might miss out on a night of sex, but you also miss out on the possiblitly that you are raping someone that you should at least feel a degree of care about, and potentially ruining his or her life.
Still, its much easier to argue agaisnt affirmative consent standards when you ignore what the other person says and invent your own words to put into their mouths.
But if you are so worried about the ‘buzz-kill’ in your pleasure place of lurve, why not ask. It’s a simple, non-threatening, natural way to determine consent. If she hands you a condom, or rolls it on for you, I think that could probably be considered to be a sign of consent in regular situations. I am sorry if this affects your suave moves of automatically putting one on, but checkign that your partner is consensual is a tad more important to me.
And you certainly seem smart enough to me to think of other ways you can ask without murdering the mood. As you move to the bed, maybe even a ‘are you sure you want to do this?’ Two things can happen - she can say yes, in which case you have sex; or she says no, in which case she wasn’t sure she wanted to do this, and I hope to God you think that giving her a chance to say that is a good thing.
Well then. Look back at the examples I posted regarding non-forceful rapes. Then come back and tell me why ou don’t think they count. For God’s sake - threatening a 14 year old girl with return to juvie if she doesn’t have sex with a man old enough to be her grandfather isn’t rape in your world? Good God.
Two fairly random people who would have to have lied in voir dire to get on the jury. Most people don’t do that. Two people who I personal would have been likely to be struck by peremptory challenges if they somehow snuck through the disqualification for cause.
This is where you start to get really offensive. To suggest that the victim is to blame by putting herself in a situation where her no is ignored is deeply deeply objectionable. What if she wore a tight skirt and make-up? People are allowed to do things you amy not think are sensible without granting a license to rapists. I think Desiree Washington was foolish in the extreme to go to Mike Tyson’s room, but that doesn’t alter the fact that he raped her, and his actions were intolerable.
Well, in my experience of battered women, their problems do tend to start with a guy. Unwanted sex has staggering effects on the victims. It’s a huge problem, especially on campuses, though that is not to say that it is a minor problem elsewhere. And hiding your head in the sand and blaming the feminists, and man haters, and those evil evil counsellors at battered women shelters ain’t solvign the problem.
By the way - any progress on locating the California case where the court found that a woman could change her mind during sex, not tell the man, and a court would convict him of rape. Not to doubt you, but no one at law school today had heard of it and I am intrigued to read it.
Stripping off your clothes and diving into my bed seems to be a pretty open invitation for naked gymnastics.
And if you don’t want to fuck, don’t come back to my place at 3 am with me and get naked. I’m female, btw, and there’s only one reason I’d invite someone home at that hour. That reason is not ‘to watch cartoons.’
Because stopping to get all serious for a minute and ask a major question is the part that kills the mood?
At the point at which I’m naked with someone and getting ready to hop to the sheets, I personally don’t have doubts and it would never occur to me to confirm verbally that they don’t.
Hello, this is earth. Have we met?
I said an element of force. Something like a threat of an extremely negative thing that the threatener has the ability to make happen constitutes ‘force’.
Not something such as ‘I won’t like you anymore’.
Jury nullification is legal, and jurors are not prohibited in any way from judging the law on its face. There would have been no need to lie during voire dire, because I’m pretty damn sure not one question about nullification would ever be asked. Prosecutors will never ask it because they don’t want juries to know that they have the legal right to nullify.
I wonder just what exactly she thought she was going to that hotel room for.
And in my experience, people who work with battered women see the victim of a man in every woman they talk to, whether she ever was raped or beaten as a matter of fact, to the counselor, she’s a victim.
It wasn’t a case, that I remember. It was something I read on the boards here a couple of years ago.
Why all the vitriol against statutory rapists? There should be more brimstone and blind animus against those who spank our children for playing doctor, and assorted other crimes in the mad attempt to instill shame into our children.
Between ill-advised couplings of different ages (and not every one is ill-advised,) and parents who freak out when their children show remote signs of any sort of connection with someone of the opposite sex, i’d pick the former. Of course, having neither is preferable, but ruining people’s lives and infringing on freedoms is not worth it to me, (at least for thos 15 yrs of age and above,) not to mention the resources that could be spent on prosecuting and jailing forcible rape rather than statutory.
Or potentially it is an invitation to many things short of penetrative sex.
There are plenty of things one can do naked that don’t involve fucking. And just be be clear, when I am using ‘you’ in these posts, I’m not meaning it to refer to you as an individual. I should use one I guess but that strikes me as forced.
It doesn’t matter - that’s my whole point. Even if she went up there to get laid, and changed her mind, he stil raped her.
Well, forgive me for disputing it then as I have found no basis for it. I’ll carry on looking though.
Just a little nitpick. The above scenerio is not robbery. Robbery is the taking of property from a person or their immediate presence through force or fear. Getting your wallet stolen while your drunk isn’t robbery. Much like you consenting after your boyfriend saying “comon’ baby, don’t you love me?” in order to have sex with you isn’t rape.
My bad. I consciously meant not to use robbery as the term and did it anyway. I meant of course theft. I would compare robbery more to first degree rape in the system I would support - rape involving direct threats of physical violence or violence itself.