|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Saturday January 26, @08:26PM EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
First you claim that molestation accusations against men are false. There's even a "News Topic" here for "False Accusations". But when an older woman (she was in her mid 20's not that much older) has consentual sex with boys in their mid-teens, you file it in the "News" category, not "False Accusations".
When men are accused, you assume it's a false accusation. When women are accused, it's not. Is this or is this not a double standard?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First you claim that molestation accusations against men are false. There's even a "News Topic" here for "False Accusations". But when an older woman (she was in her mid 20's not that much older) has consentual sex with boys in their mid-teens, you file it in the "News" category, not "False Accusations".
When men are accused, you assume it's a false accusation. When women are accused, it's not. Is this or is this not a double standard?
If you look back at the "False Accusations" articles, you will notice that it is not we who are claiming the accusations are false. The news stories are about men who have proven the accusations against them were false.
There is a significant difference between those stories and the ones posted above. Perhaps you should actually click on the links and read the stories prior to judging us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I rarely bother to read the threads here anymore.
Recently most threads have been dominated by replies to the troll. Ending anonymous posting would go part-way to solving this problem; even better if regulars just ignored her.
sd
Those who like this sort of thing
will find this the sort of thing they like.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Readers should note the feminist thought process here. We point out that some sexual assault accusations by women against men are false. In the feminist mind, this becomes When men are accused, you assume it's a false accusation.
I think a diet of pure sugar and ethanol would be better for the brain than a diet of feminism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anon,
Note the careful use of the term "alleged" in the story title. That was done on purpose. Yet I also think that the woman's admission that she "would have" had sex with one of the boys, if the circumstances were different, pretty strongly kills her defense. I would think the same of a man who said such a thing.
Another point is that for most of the cases where women have statutorially raped young boys, they have admitted it, and we report the story because the woman typically ends up with a very light sentence. Perhaps if you came up with some more specific examples of stories posted here, your issue might be more relevant.
Scott
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What I find interesting is that the article states that it may not be rape because the boys may have consented, but when men may or may not have had sex with girls, or boys for that mater, of the same age it is called rape and consent is not considered. Also interesting to me is the responce of the first commenter in regards to the women being close in age (26) to the boys (14 and 15) I wonder if the writer would consider 14 and 15 year old girls close in age to a 26 year old male teacher?
The fact is teenagers can be sexual, but why is that understood when the older partner is a women and the younger is male?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think a diet of pure sugar and ethanol would be better for the brain than a diet of feminism.
LOL Amen!!!! Ladies, forget the "patriarchy" and drink your vodka. [sarcasm to make point]
I have a funny feeling they're going to make HER look like the victim here. And as for age...well, they were minors, so any sex with an adult over age 18 would be considered statuatory (sp?) rape.
The most blatant, un-PC observation one could make about this is it disproves the old "girls'-gym-teacher-is-predatory-lesbian" stereotype. Now it seems straight girls have gotten in on it, too...
"Female men's activist" is not an oxymoron.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The woman in question has not been charged with rape. I've noticed several cases have been represented as allegations of rape here when in fact there was no such allegation.
The idea that sexual contact between a minor and an adult is rape is an American distortion to the concept. Please don't put such stupid words in others' mouths.
sd
Those who like this sort of thing
will find this the sort of thing they like.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The idea that sexual contact between a minor and an adult is rape is an American distortion to the concept. Please don't put such stupid words in others' mouths.
By law in most states, statutory rape is sex (consensual or not) between an adult and a minor under the age of 18. When discussing American matters of law, it is reasonable to hold men and women to the same standard, which is the point in most of these posts.
Whether you agree with that law is a different matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday January 27, @09:04AM EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
Nightmist:
In Maryland, the age of consent is 16, between adults and minors. I'm not crying about that, though I can honestly say that I'm not that big a fan of the (mostly) teen girl mallrats. I'm not sure whether in the majority of states its 16,17, or 18. I know in a few states that 14 or 15 ( I forget which) is the age. Also, considering the various restrictions a person of 18 has ( they can't drink beer or own a handgun for self-defense but they can join the army-- go figure) I'm not sure its fair to call ANYONE under 21 an adult these days.
I think SD has a point, though. Why not refer to statuatory rape crimes as statuatory rape? Just because Missy, who is 20, has sex with Gunther Jr. (All of 16)who is of too tender an age to consent in state "x", the world is not gonna end. Meanwhile, it seems pretty unfair of us to
label Missy a sexual pervert, and compare what she did to rape- Gunther Jr. is pretty happy. I know I'd be if I was in his shoes. Unless she had a tyke-- but they are both old enough to know where babies come from.
I'm not arguing that men and women be treated any differently. But I really wish the stupid criminal "so-called-justice" system would stop publishing the names of anyone accused of one of its crimes, until that person is found to be guilty. And I wish we'd let rape be rape, and statuatory rape be statuatory rape- they are two entirely different things. Last, but not least there is a term for someone who has sex with a preadolescent human -- that term is "child molester". Lets make sure to use that properly too.
Remo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday January 27, @09:17AM EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
Btw: Just because I pointed out how ridiculous it is in many ways to call an 18 year old an adult (And yes, I know about the US code and that 18 is the age), doesn't mean that I think LadyRivka is a child. So you can all put those gummi bears and lollipops away! :)
Remo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remo wrote: "Why not refer to statuatory rape crimes as statuatory rape?"
I think you've made a valid point here, Smoking Drive and Remo.
We've often complained about how feminists have changed the meaning of the word "rape" to include non-violent rapes and sometimes even consentual sex with a communication gap. Out of respect for men who *are* violently raped, we shouldn't equate statutory rape with "true" rape.
I will change the heading of this story and at some point in the next couple of days go through past stories on the subject and make sure to include the term "statutory" to make this clearer. I'll make this a policy with the other admins so we're consistent about it in the future.
Thank you for pointing this out to us.
Scott
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Tuesday January 29, @10:55AM EST (#16)
|
|
|
|
|
Scott and Nightmist:
I can only speak for myself, but thank you on my part for taking SD's and my concerns into account. Scott: Thanks for taking extra time and effort to correct past errors. None would condemn you for failing to do so, as you are a busy man.
Far as I am concerned its all about the proper meanings of words. I'm glad you see that using the word "rape" to refer to consensual underage sex is one of the unwarranted expansions of the word that has helped to create the current hysterical anti-male climate.
Again, I thank you.
Remo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think SD has a point, though. Why not refer to statuatory rape crimes as statuatory rape?
That's a good point, and I think it's what we should do. In spite of the media's reluctance to call statutory rape as it is when it applies to boys rather than girls, we can at least differentiate the varying degrees of rape properly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you noticed in the last post of mine, I DID mention Statuatory. I'm not saying it was rape; I'm saying in most states, it's statuatory.
And, yes, it IS unfair to put consensual sex on the line b/c one partner is say, 16 and the other is 19. American laws are growing ever more confusing!
Sorry to those who misunderstood me.
"Female men's activist" is not an oxymoron.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday January 28, @10:04AM EST (#15)
|
|
|
|
|
American laws are growing ever more confusing
Yes, they are Lady Rivka. I don't know your background in civics, so please forgive me if I repeat anything you already know. Foreign readers might also benefit if they read my comments now. Same as I'd benefit reading about, say, Canadian law.
American law is basically administered by 3 court systems, although only 2 are official and mentioned in the Constitution.
1. State courts
2. Federal courts
3. The unenumerated system of the Family courts aka "Kangaroo" courts.
The court systems are farther broken into two categories: Civil and Criminal.
Civil courts are used in practice for any crimes that would result in a "misdemeanor" level offense, or jail time of less than one year, or both. They also take most small claims of economic damage, car tickets, etc. Rules of evidence are lower than in criminal court -- "Preponderance of evidence" rather than "Beyond a reasonable doubt". Family courts fall under the "civil" classification.
Criminal courts handle your rapes, murders, forgeries, etc. In short, "infamous crimes". They have the highest standards of proof for conviction.
Now , the US Constitution applies equally to all citizens in all states in the union. However, each state has its own constitution, and while it may grant you extra rights for living in that state, it cannot grant you less than the US Constitution. Thus, you have more or less firearms rights, for instance, depending on where you live.
And states pass their own laws. Thats why your sixteen year old girlfriend can get you thrown in the slammer in one state, while costing you no more than hickeys in another.
State courts handle most criminal cases and most civil cases. The Federal courts generally handle cases involving the rights enumerated in the Constitution, crimes against Federal property, and little else. I say "generally", because the Federal courts have taken more and more cases from the states over the years -- usually using the much -abused Interstate Commerce Clause. VAWA act #1 was one law that utilized this strategem. It tried to create an action to sue in Federal Courts for women who failed in sexual cases in state courts. The U.S. Supreme court correctly struck this down, saying that if you consider violence against women to be an activity that affects "interstate commerce" than just about anything can be held as affecting interstate commerce, and congress could regulate anything!
Anyway, the worst court system in our country is the Family Court system. Its very Constitutionality is dubious in most opinions. Its history is short -- basically 35 years or so.
People in this system are guilty until proven innocent, and many lives are ruined because of this direct contradiction of American and English common law. If your divorcing , accused of child abuse or molestation (short of rape)this is where you will end up. Good luck.
The American court system has changed tremendously over the last 50 years, and often to the detriment of men and citizens in general. How it got to this point, and where it is going I am going to find out. But vigilance is called for.
Remo
Thats where we are now.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
