When I was 18 I had a 16 year old girlfriend

I was a Senior, she was a Sophmore. It was a great relationship. It lasted four years.

I was reading through that rape thread. I just want to put aside the issue of rape - that is a factual judgment the jury made - none of us has seen all the evidence.

But regardless - what utterly shocked me was all the people in that thread going absolutely ballistic and calling it 'child porn' and 'statutory rape'. If that's the case, then even if it was all consensual it would still be crimes, and major crimes at that.

HE WAS 18, SHE WAS 16.

WTF????????

(Note: I really do not want to argue the issue of the rape.)

The offense is treated differently depending on the age of the older person, being a serious misdemeanor if the elder is still a minor, and a felony if the elder is a full adult.

If both parties are under consensual age, there is no crime (if all parties agreed to the sex).

If the elder is between eighteen and twenty-one, the lesser offense is committed.

And is that a law or public policy?
That policy enable reckless "young adult" activity (which means I support it, LOL).
That law does seem to make sense.

It is the law. It was necessary some years ago for me to look into it over some difficulties an informal ward had with a partner's parent.

It seems a reaonable enough distinction to me.

I am uncertain whether my home state (NY) has this stipulation. NY courts tend to have logical, strict laws...enforced through an overworked, plea bargain driven court system.

The girl was passed out drunk and they gang-banged her, videotaping the action.... what is so hard to get?

kinda changes things, huh? :eyes:

Back to highschool - I was 16 she was 18 we had been dating for four years and were in the same grade. To think that it could be considered rape is in my mind just absolutely rediculous.

that when you would be 17 and 354 days it's ok, but the day you turn 18 it's rape. Weird law.

It's completely NORMAL AND NATURAL! Personally, I think people should wait, but it's not some kind of major crime.

Rape is rape, and it is ALWAYS WRONG. But a 16 year old and an 18 yr. old, in a consensual relationship is fine, it's not rape, it's not child porn.

I see our society devolving into nothing but a bunch of hysterical witch hunting.

It saddens me.

really not hard to figure out.

As the case in point demonstrated, you can do a hell of a lot to a woman legally or illegally and odds are you will still walk.

as are 4 male partners for one girl.

That's what I'm talking about. The criminal laws that define child porn and stat. rape do not take the number of people involved into account, they do not touch those kinds of nuances. They lay down a broad law that covers all kinds of relationships.

Thus, if what happened that night was child porn or stat. rape then it would also apply to otherwise perfectly healthy high school relationships.

That is the salient point here.

I'm NOT ARGUING SHE WAS NOT RAPED.

but not for the child porn. Possession of explicit materials involving a minor, even if that minor is your girlfriend, is child pornography.

That is truly Kafkaesque. It's foolishness. A sixteen year old girl could take a picture of herself naked, an artistic pose if you will, and she could be charged with child porn! Now that is truly unbelievable.

to be porn, and second off it would have to be shared with other people for sexual or financial purposes. You cannot have pronography of yourself, there has to be someone else involved.

a lot of young men were in the service. They had the words statuatory rape (which is consensual sex with someone under 18) drilled into them.

My aunt referred to these young women as "jail bait."

But what usually happened back then was that if the girl got pregnant then she and the guy would get married. The legal age for marriage in Mississippi was 15 or even below that if I recall correctly.

I remember a young man in my hometown going to Mississippi to get married. His mother commented on the fact that he was old enough to get married legally but he wasn't old enough to have a driver's license.

You may be "all grown up", but her parents may feel differently about her being "all grown up".

I was the one who was being "raped." She was two years older than I.

So it would be up to my parents in your eyes yes?

And I bet that your parents did not have a problem with that.

I ( I am a caseworker) had a 17 yr old male that "ran away" from home to live with his 22 year old girlfriend. His parents had a problem with it.

Parents have a right to require that their children obey their lawful commands.

ps - that must have been a pretty cool set up you had in HS.

even when I clearly said otherwise in the post. Shows that you as a caseworker are sexually discriminatory.

And that is why this is absolutely retarded.

Hell no my parents didn't have a problem with it. No one EVER even mentioned it as anything but completely normal. She was a year behind and I was a year ahead. And as for it being a pretty cool set up or whatever it was no different than anyone else. I think you need to examine your biases if you think it was some kind of unique thing.

For various reasons.

It is the same impulse as all the hoopla that surrounded black men dating white women. I've NEVER heard someone rail against black women dating white men. Hell even the people who CONSTANTLY railed against how black men are out to rape white women raped black women themselves. Look at our buddy Strom.

Look at teachers messing with their students. This is STILL seen as a man going after young girls even when we publically see female teachers being caught with their students. It is just sexual bias that should not exist.

statutory rapes are committed by men. That's fact. Look up the stats. Out of all pedophiles, women make up 3%. Even saying that, yes, female pedophiles are underreported, men far and away commit the crime more often.

Here's a link:

http://www.kidsafenetwork.com/statistics.htm

When there is a clear and obvious bias in society that one type of "statutory rape" is not only not attacked but as a previous poster in this thread said "a pretty cool setup" while the other is seen as some horrid crime. So is there any question why reported cases of one is MUCH higher than the reported cases of the other?

Considering that many male pedophiles get away with it as well?

The other poster surprised me with that comment. I did not believe it was appropiate.

I guess irrational attacks are an effective way of winning an arguement.

I used pedophile because when people are arrested for statutory rapes, THAT is what they are charged as. Geez, get over yourself.

We had extended the issue past you and your ex. In fact as many posters in the thread have already stated, 2 years difference isn't even considered a crime in most places, it has to be greater than 5 years. And the age of consent in the US in most states is 16 anyway.

Women dating younger men are considered immature, and trying to "rob the cradle". But men do it all the time as a sign of sexual prowess. The bias goes both ways.

ProgressiveConn, I think the FBI and US Dept of Justice Statisticians have a better feel for the numbers on this than your claims of bias:

http://www.paralumun.com/issuesrapestats.htm

In 1995, 354,670 women were the victims of a rape or sexual assault. (NationalCrime Victimization Survey. Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice, 1996.) One of the most startling aspects of sex crimes is how many go unreported. The most common reasons given by women for not reporting these crimes are the belief that it is a private or personal matter and the fear of reprisal from the assailant.

Approximately 28% of victims are raped by husbands or boyfriends, 35% by acquaintances, and 5% by other relatives. (Violence against
Women, Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Dept. of Justice, 1994)

The FBI estimates that only 37% of all rapes are reported to the police. U.S. Justice Department statistics are even lower, with only 26% of all rapes or attempted rapes being reported to law enforcement officials.

In 1994-1995, only 251,560 rapes and sexual assaults were reported to law enforcement officials -- less than one in every three. (National Crime Victimization Survey, Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice, 1996.) An overwhelming majority of rape service agencies believe that public education about rape, and expanded counseling and advocacy services for rape victims, would be effective in increasing the willingness of victims to report rapes to the police. (Rape in America, 1992, National Victim Center with Crime Victims Research and Treatment Center.) Using Uniform Crime Report data for 1994 and 1995, the Bureau of Justice Statistics found that of rape victims who reported the offense to law enforcement, about 40% were under the age of 18, and 15% were younger than 12.4

I didn't read your post carefully and assumed that you were a female. I apologize for that.

Here is a revised post -

She may be "all grown up", but your parents may feel differently about you being "all grown up".

Teenagers do alot of things that are illegal, yet are really "no big deal". It is usually the parents that make it a big deal.

Your assumption shows your sexual bias. And as a case worker you are a perfect example of our bias as a society.

It's a logical assumption. CHECK THE FACTS

that is all...

I didn't read your post carefully and assumed that you were a female. I apologize for that.

Here is a revised post -

She may be "all grown up", but your parents may feel differently about you being "all grown up".

Teenagers do alot of things that are illegal, yet are really "no big deal". It is usually the parents that make it a big deal.

age of consent. The penalty for offenses with a minor under the age of 18 are much less than the penalty for a minor under the age of 16 which are far less than the penalty for a minor under the age of 14.

Be that as it may..there's no penalty if you don't have sex with her under the age of 18..same for a male.

On edit: I'm more concerned that if someone has sex with someone under the age of consent, the person under the age of consent is just a child but if the person under the age of consent kills somebody the law will recognize that same person as an adult. To me that is far more fucked up.

I tell the kids that I work with, if your a young adult, then don't sleep with kids. Remember, its only rape if someone disapproves (so, in other words, if your girlfriends father didn't want you diddling his little girl, he could press charges against you. If he approved of your relationship, then you are "good to go").

4 years versus 4 hours is a lot of difference.

I knew kids who were ready at 14, who knew about birth control and who protected themselves and their partners. I also knew people in their early 20s who were NOT ready, who didn't take responsibility for themselves of their partners. You can't give a set number as an age of consent, especially when both partners are close in age. It just doesn't work. At some point, somebody with SENSE has to make a judgement.

The problem is that people want simple answers, simple laws, and simple solutions to complex problems. Real life is never like that, but it doesn't stop them from trying.

At some point, we have to rely on the judgment of the judiciary, of parents, and of the kids involved. We need to give kids free access to the tools which will keep them safe.

The concerns I have for early sexual experimentation involve safety and whether or not it has been coerced by a much older partner and is entirely voluntary.

Other than that, I honestly believe each case needs to be decided on the information at hand about the maturity of the kids involved and their ability to protect themselves from serious consequences.

On edit: obviously I am not talking about prepubescent children here.

The law is set up to protect adults from preying on young and impressionable children. Sorry, I don't care how mature a 14 year old thinks he or she is, they should NOT be having sex with a 25 year old. It's not perfect and that is why concessions are made for those close in age groups, but there has to be some sort of limit.

If I had a thirteen year old kid who went and started having sex with a 25 year old you bet your ass I would want that adult thrown in prison. Without age of consent laws if my kid decided that "they were in love" I wouldn't be able to do anything about it.

Kids are kids. We don't let them vote, we don't let them drive, we don't let them smoke, we don't let them drink, they have to go to school and they are required to have a legal guardian. We do that to protect them. One 14 year old is unlikely to charm and lure another 14 year old. But there are some perverted adults who will.

and have not stood trial yet.

but isn't there a sort of grace period depending on the ages in your state? I know in AZ, the age of consent is 18. So, the law states if an adult has sexual relations with a minor under 18, it is statutory rape. But there is a 3 year "grace period." (And I know that's not the legal term for it.) So in effect, if a 19 year old has relations with a 16 year old, that wouldn't be against the law even though it's a minor/adult thing. The reasoning is that if two consenting individuals are only 3 years apart then it's somehow okay and understandable. Again, I'm sure I'm making all you legal types roll your eyes at my lack of legal terminology, but I hope I'm getting my point across.

And other various kinds of things....

But some on DU seem to think we should be locking up our kids in droves. Cuz if it's a crime then most of our kids are criminals.

In my state, statutory rape applies to sex with someone against their will or who is mentally defective or who has assumed the role parent and is living in the same household or under the age of 15. The closer in age they are, the lesser the charge.

North Carolina General Statutes

§14-27.5(a)
*(a) A person is guilty of a sexual offense in the second degree if the person engages in a sexual act with another person:

§14-27.5(a)(1)

*(1)By force and against the will of the other person; or

§14-27.5(a)
(2)*(2)Who is mentally defective, mentally incapacitated, or physically helpless, and the person performing the act knows or should reasonably know that the other person is mentally defective, mentally incapacitated, or physically helpless.

§14-27.5(b)
*(b) Any person who commits the offense defined in this section is guilty of a Class C felony. (1979, c. 682, s. 1; 1979, 2nd Sess., c. 1316, s. 7; 1981, c. 63, c. 179, s. 14; 1993, c. 539, s. 1131; 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c).)

§ 14-27.6: Repealed by Session Laws 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 14, s. 71(3).
*§ 14-27.6: Repealed by Session Laws 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 14, s. 71(3).

§ 14-27.7. Intercourse and sexual offenses with certain victims; consent no defense.

*§ 14-27.7. Intercourse and sexual offenses with certain victims; consent no defense.

§14-27.7
*If a defendant who has assumed the position of a parent in the home of a minor victim engages in vaginal intercourse or a sexual act with a victim who is a minor residing in the home, or if a person having custody of a victim of any age or a person who is an agent or employee of any person, or institution, whether such institution is private, charitable, or governmental, having custody of a victim of any age engages in vaginal intercourse or a sexual act with such victim, the defendant is guilty of a Class E felony. Consent is not a defense to a charge under this section. (1979, c. 682, s. 1; 1979, 2nd Sess., c. 1316, s. 9; 1981, c. 63, c. 179, s. 14; 1993, c. 539, s. 1132; 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c).)

§ 14-27.7A. Statutory rape or sexual offense of person who is 13, 14, or 15 years old.
§ 14-27.7A. Statutory rape or sexual offense of person who is 13, 14, or 15 years old.

§14-27.70A(a)
*(a) A defendant is guilty of a Class B1 felony if the defendant engages in vaginal intercourse or a sexual act with another person who is 13, 14, or 15 years old and the defendant is at least six years older than the person, except when the defendant is lawfully married to the person.

§14-27.70A(b)
*(b) A defendant is guilty of a Class C felony if the defendant engages in vaginal intercourse or a sexual act with another person who is 13, 14, or 15 years old and the defendant is more than four but less than six years older than the person, except when the defendant is lawfully married to the person. (1995, c. 281, s. 1.)

§ 14-27.8. No defense that victim is spouse of person committing act.
*§ 14-27.8. No defense that victim is spouse of person committing act.

§14-27.8
*A person may be prosecuted under this Article whether or not the victim is the person's legal spouse at the time of the commission of the alleged rape or sexual offense. (1979, c. 682, s. 1; 1987, c. 742; 1993, c. 274.)

§ 14-27.9. No presumption as to incapacity.
*§ 14-27.9. No presumption as to incapacity.

§14-27.9

*In prosecutions under this Article, there shall be no presumption that any person under the age of 14 years is physically incapable of committing a sex offense of any degree or physically incapable of committing rape, or that a male child under the age of 14 years is incapable of engaging in sexual intercourse. (1979, c. 682, s. 1.)

§ 14-27.10. Evidence required in prosecutions under this Article.

*§ 14-27.10. Evidence required in prosecutions under this Article.
Introduction
S 287. AMEND STATUTORY RAPE LAW. TO AMEND THE LAW REGARDING STATUTORY RAPE AND THE AGE OF CONSENT. Amends GS 14-27.2(a) and -27.4 to make it statutory rape and statutory sexual offense when victim is under the age of 16 (now, 13) and the defendant is at least 12 years old and 5 years older than victim (now, 4). Effective December 1, 1995.
Intro. by Allran.

FROM: Case Law - (http://www.ncinsider.com/insider/supreme/2000/supreme0505/anthony.html)

I think you know VERY well that the reason the reactions were what they were is because of the context of the situation.

:eyes:

That's what I'm talking about. The criminal laws that define child porn and stat. rape do not take the number of people involved into account, they do not touch those kinds of nuances. They lay down a broad law that covers all kinds of relationships.

Thus, if what happened that night was child porn or stat. rape then it would also apply to otherwise perfectly healthy high school relationships.

That is the salient point here.

I'm NOT ARGUING SHE WAS NOT RAPED.

and you know good and well the reason for the outrage was the circumstances!

No, not all crimes are equal... circumstances play a huge role in prosecution.

Next you'll be telling us you agree with mandatory minimums! Do you?

It reminds me of several other threads that were set up to bash liberals.

What Would JESUS FUCKING DO? :eyes:

I don't know how old you are, but since I am in my middle years and can look back, I can see how young I was at 16. Not fully capable of making mature, adult decisions. When I was 16, although I realized I was still a kid, I didn't realize how much maturing I had to go.

There has to be a line somewhere. 18 is it in most states. 16 is just not old enough for the teen to give consent. That's why it's called statutory rape. Even if you're able to talk a 16 year old into having sex or doing something else, it is still statutory rape. They are incapable of putting up the same defenses as one several years older.

I was 17 and had a boyfriend who was 19. I guess that was statutory rape. It happens all the time. Doesn't make it legal, or right.

And there are lesser charges for closer ages.

If a 17 and 19 year old are having consentual sex, it is not considered statutory rape in many states. So this OP has NO GROUNDS for his post and has failed to research his state laws on this. He doesn't even know if it was "legally" rape or not, in his case. :eyes:

Might be most states. In Canada and some European counties, it is lower.

and I believe it was in the state we were in - in addition, if you read the thread above there are also special provisions often made when the age is so close as in 16 and 18. and for the record, we didn't even have sex until she was 18, and I was 20. but the essential point remains, I knew many people in high school who were having sex at the age of 16, and we shouldn't be talking like they're all criminals.

My only point with this thread was to point how we have to be careful how we apply words that carry criminal connotations.

As a parent I understand the temptation to get your daughter away from the one she lost her virginity to and blame HIM for the whole thing, but as a woman who was once 17 and "in love" with my 21 year old boyfriend, I know this will only lead to the battle of a lifetime with my daughter.

I eventually married him after dating for 2 years and living together for 4 years. I'm sure my husband would not take kindly to our daughter dating an "adult" but let's face it...IT ISN'T RAPE, unless there actually was non consensual sex. I really don't care how the law defines it. The fact of the matter in my case was that I was the aggressor, not my husband!

I will NEVER irrationally attempt to press charges against someone just because the law says I can. I would much rather sit down and have a RATIONAL conversation with my kid and explain to her why I think she made the wrong decision and then tell her if she's going to continue a relationship with this man/boy (men are NOT adults at 18 or 21 believe me!)she needs to protect herself from AIDS. Since I watched three family members die of the disease that would be my number one priority. Pregnancy may ruin a life at least temporarily, but you won't die of it!

Sorry to say, any parent that tries to control their kid this way is in for years of difficult battles. I know. My parents tried to control me this way. It took me many, many years to get over it. I think they would probably agree with me that it wasn't worth it, for either of us!

lifetime, no one could accuse me of a sell out. and you are right. this is absurdity we have gone to. there was a case in the south i believe. both in high school he black, the girl white. that was the outrage. they charged him with rape.

i dont agree with this at all. one of those things in our judicial system i would hope they would use a brain and they dont.

adn all those outraged that says ............it is a law, and that is as far as they will allow, i feel are part of the problem. we are better than that

not gonna argue with anyone. merely my view i am sharing

and i know nothing about the case. but as far as the case goes, if she were drunk, and four guys and they tape her, ...........they are all pigs.

i also have my view in any female allowing htemselves in htat position have to learn a lesson from, and accept a certain amount of responsibility for it

this in no way excuses the boys. they were pigs. if it were one of my boys, i would be ashamed

was NOT about age differences. In MANY states, it's considered statutory rape UNDER the age of 15 or 17.

This case involved a drunk girl and FOUR MALES who videotaped her, had "sex" with her, (she says she did NOT consent) and wrote lude comments on her back with marker. It was despicable. TWO of them FLED the country.

People need to check their state statutues before they start railing. This OP has no leg to stand on. It may be LEGAL for a 16 and 18 year old to have sex in his state.

Maybe it was rape. I honestly don't know. I haven't seen the evidence. But I certainly agree with seabeyond that their behavior was awful. They behaved like pigs.

I'm just saying people should not be yelling stat rape and child porn. Those crimes would apply regardless of the consent issue. It's a whole other ball of wax. And they were only two years apart. 18 and 16.

Can you see this?

People were "yelling" because some posters on that other thread seemed to think that because the girl got drunk she consented to be raped.

And she was a hottie. Mmmmmmm......... Pleasant memories...... Okay, we started dating when I was 17 and a senior, but I turned 18 right before graduation. Does that make me a criminal?

In most states, no, that is not considered statutory rape. :eyes:

The difference between 16 and 18 is barely noticable. High school relationships should be viewed as just that.

one of my brother's friends, both our famlies knew, and loved the idea. It didn't last long though. I wouldn't put out. We gracefully went our own ways, I am now 30 and he's 33 and apparently still likes teenage girls... ick.

We hate America, too. We get it. So, why do you want to be here?

In WA there must be 48 months difference in age if the younger of the two is at least 14 but under 16.

A 16 yo having consensual sex with an 18 year old is not a crime in WA.

Rape Child First Degree:
victim under age 12 and 24 months younger than perp

Rape Child Second Degree:
victim at least 12 but less than 14 and 36 months younger than perp

Rape CHild Third Degree
Victim at least 14 but less than 16 and 48 months younger than perp.

I don't agree with those that think a 15 year old is capable of consenting to sex with an adult.