Boarding School Graduate Cleared of Rape

[Josiah]

Have you followed this in the news? Just a VERY, VERY familiar example....

Teens are told - over and over and over and over - at school, in songs, in movies, on the internet, in books - that all teens are horny animals who can't help themselves and basically live to have sex. That "boys will be boys." This JUST IS. You don't have to like it (and MOST but by no means all parents don't) but it just is. Your teen boy will cease to be a virgin at the first opportunity.... and don't count on your sweet daughter saying "no", in fact, she might be the one to make it happen. Then, it happens. And all get upset..... lawsuits fly.... court cases happen.
I find it all rather hypocritical (as one not TOO far removed from all this, age wise).

Now, this 19 year old (then a senior at the boarding school) SAYS it was consensual. The girl (then 15) says it was not. But we tell minors they are UNABLE to consent, to be responsible.... they can't drive until they are 16, they can't vote or enter contracts until they are 18, they can't order a beer until they are 21. But they can "consent" to sex at what.... 10? 13? CERTAINLY by 16 when society assumes no virgins any longer exist. And of course, since there are no signed contracts here (that day probably IS coming!), it's ALWAYS going to be "he says/she says" but nothing to substantiate it either way. And remember: these are horny teens at the pure mercy of their hormones and they CAN'T HELP IT cuz it's just chemical. But wait.... See more hypocrisy?

I remember those years WELL. I was a nice looking boy with no problems when it came to girls being interested. I was 13 (yup, thirteeen!) when the first girl strongly asked me for sex. By the time I was 15, I felt like a freak being a virgin.... a FREAK.... although I strongly suspected most guys were LYING and that I was hardly alone. I had enough self-esteem, a strong enough moral compus, enough reality to hold on to my virginity - and even feel okay about it, but EVERYTHING in soceity told me I was a loser, a freak, maybe gay and certainly insecure and socially inept. I was able to say TO MYSELF: "they're wrong." It wasn't easy.

I think modern soceity is sending mixed messages: that somehow sex is serious, adult stuff that requries maturity and MUTUAL respect (if not a wedding ring!!!!!!), but teens are helpless animals who - unless gay, freaks, or just too inept or ugly - WILL have sex (just accept the reality, you don't have to like it).

Don't get me wrong: IF this boy had non-consenual sex, I would want the book thrown at him. And if it was consensual, at her too. I just find it.... hypocritical.... to say that no matter what, HE should get 20 years in prison in spite of WE telling him this is NORMAL, expected, healthy, GOING to happen - he's a loser, a freak, gay or unhealthy physically and/or mentally unless he does have sex as soon as possible and as often as possible.

I don't - DO NOT - condone what this guy did (the court here says he did NOT rape her but did use his computer to TRY to). I just feel SOME of the blame falls on society for what our society SHOUTS to teens, especially teen boys. I wonder if ADULTS somehow "get off" on the idea of teens having all this supposed sex - this all the movies, books etc. written by ADULTS - but get understandably horrified when it's THEIR daughter who is pregnant or emotionally hurt????

Another thing: this particular boy will now be a registered sex offender for the rest of his life.... for "attempting to lure her via his computer." I SUSPECT this happens a lot..... Does it make a teen boy or girl an official registered sex offender for life? Why THIS boy (who I realize was 18 at the time; she 15)? A little hypocrisy - or at least inconsistency? If YOUR teen (boy or girl, doesn't matter) said something suggestive in an email or text, would you support him/her being thus made an official, registered sex offender for life as a result, as happened here? Maybe.... But then seems to ME we REALLY need to change what we are saying to teens....

I realize, there's a problem here: Teens have the equipment but not the sense. Been there.... In LOTS of things, not just sex..... But IMO, we need to SUPPORT those teens with REAL reasons. We can't expect them to act one way when we tell them they are going to act in the opposite way. If we want them to be responsible, we need to call them to that, EQUIP them for that, EXPECT them of that - and consistently rebuke them if they fail at that (boy or girl). We can't tell them "don't" if we can't tell them why - and (he's a point some adults need to avoid) if they don't avoid sex out of marriage.


Sorry. When I was a teen, I really struggled with this. These stories came around often, with much "interest."



- Josiah

 

[dogs4thewin]

If you asks me, there should be Romeo and Juliet laws EVERYWHERE, and we should not make cases near as big a deal if the ONLY reason it is rape is because of the age of the "victim". Now, by all means, if it was NOT consentual he should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

 

[Josiah]

If you asks me, there should be Romeo and Juliet laws EVERYWHERE, and we should not make cases near as big a deal if the ONLY reason it is rape is because of the age of the "victim". Now, by all means, if it was NOT consentual he should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

I understand that view (don't agree with it, but let's move on).... but we tell these same teens they are way too immature and irresponsible to "consent." They can't have ANY binding contracts (in the USA anyway) until they are 18 because they are too immature and too irresponsible to agree to something on their own. They can't vote... they can't order a beer; they can't sign up for a sport or a school outing! But they can CONSENT to something a big as intercourse when they are what..... 10? 13? SURELY by 16 becuase soceity indicates there are no virgins after that except for the ugly and the inept. AND.... how do you document "consent" when there is nothing written (a major problem now on college campuses for those OVER 18!) - it just a "he says/she says" with NO WAY to know.



- Josiah

 

[dogs4thewin]

I understand that view (don't agree with it, but let's move on).... but we tell these same teens they are way too immature and irresponsible to "consent." They can't have ANY binding contracts (in the USA anyway) until they are 18 because they are too immature and too irresponsible to agree to something on their own. They can't vote... they can't order a beer; they can't sign up for a sport or a school outing! But they can CONSENT to something a big as intercourse when they are what..... 10? 13? SURELY by 16 becuase soceity indicates there are no virgins after that except for the ugly and the inept. AND.... how do you document "consent" when there is nothing written (a major problem now on college campuses for those OVER 18!) - it just a "he says/she says" with NO WAY to know.



- Josiah

Most states are 16. As for no way to know you are VERY right which is why rape is SOOOO hard to prove because DNA is NOT enough; since it ONLY proves intercourse.

 

[tango]

Most states are 16. As for no way to know you are VERY right which is why rape is SOOOO hard to prove because DNA is NOT enough; since it ONLY proves intercourse.

In many cases "proving" intercourse is of no value because neither party disputes that intercourse took place.

 

[dogs4thewin]

In many cases "proving" intercourse is of no value because neither party disputes that intercourse took place.

That is what I am saying; even if they did in cases where BOTH parties can legally consent proving that there was intercourse ( whether or not that is contested is NOT enough for a conviction.

 

[psalms 91]

After listening to what was on the news as to what was presented I think they arrived at a decision that was right under the law, I also think age of consent should be lowered as well

 

[dogs4thewin]

After listening to what was on the news as to what was presented I think they arrived at a decision that was right under the law, I also think age of consent should be lowered as well

To what? In most states it is 16.

 

[tango]

That is what I am saying; even if they did in cases where BOTH parties can legally consent proving that there was intercourse ( whether or not that is contested is NOT enough for a conviction.

Sure, we're agreed on that. When it is literally nothing more than one person's word against another (and presumably such situations don't tend to have witnesses present) it's hard to see how anything other than a Not Guilty verdict can be returned.

 

[psalms 91]

To what? In most states it is 16.

In my state it is 18 and that is way to old in my opinion.

 

[visionary]

I would like to know who is making a federal case out of this and why.

 

[psalms 91]

The mass hysteria that surrounds these types of cases, I dont think he should have been convicted of anything but that is just my opinion

 

[dogs4thewin]

In my state it is 18 and that is way to old in my opinion.

Here in Georgia and most other states it is 16 some have 17. There is only like five or six states ( I think) where it is 18 and many places have Romeo and Juliet laws ( should be a requirement (particularly if you are going to have it at 18.)

 

[psalms 91]

Unfortunately we dont have those type of laws and many kids are getting into trouble because of age

 

[dogs4thewin]

Unfortunately we dont have those type of laws and many kids are getting into trouble because of age

That is why they need the laws because let us be frank there are MUCH worse things the kids could do and WE are the ones paying for those laws. If the state chooses to lock an 18 year old up for ten and twenty years for having sex with his or her 17 year old partner who is DIRECTLY paying for room, board, healthcare and everything else for those years? It is not the kid.

 

[psalms 91]

Not to mention their lives are ruined and it is prison

 

[dogs4thewin]

Not to mention their lives are ruined and it is prison

Although, I looked PA up on the internet and it DOES seem to be a decent place to be incarcerated if you must be as from my understanding pretty much every inmate gets store ( assuming of course he or she has money on his or her books.

 

[tango]

That is why they need the laws because let us be frank there are MUCH worse things the kids could do and WE are the ones paying for those laws. If the state chooses to lock an 18 year old up for ten and twenty years for having sex with his or her 17 year old partner who is DIRECTLY paying for room, board, healthcare and everything else for those years? It is not the kid.

It would certainly make a lot more sense to have a tiered rule.

Just for example, we could say that the age of consent is 13 but below the age of 18 any sexual encounter where one party is more than three years older than the other is considered statutory rape. It would mean that a 13-year-old girl sleeping with her 14-year-old boyfriend wouldn't result in any charges, but if she were groomed and abused by someone in their 20s or older it would. You'd still have some issues if, say, one party was 14 and 364 days and the other was 18 and 2 days, so some form of sliding scale of severity would be needed.

It is ridiculous that a couple of teenagers getting it together results in one of them tarred as a sex offender for life, if fundamentally what was going on was nothing more than a horny teenage boy getting together with his equally horny teenage girlfriend.


At the same time I think sex education programs need to give at least some time to the notion that abstinence is a perfectly valid choice to make. As it stands from what we read in the media you'd think that anyone who wasn't getting it several times a week was somehow falling short so it's hardly surprising that people feel they need to "step up" and "get theirs" so they aren't "below average". It's really no different from the airbrushed models on the covers of glossy magazines that make teenage girls think they are fat when the truth is nothing more than their mirrors don't give them the results of hours of Photoshop manipulation.