Girl, 13, charged as sex offender and victim

So why is the boy labeled a criminal, found guilty of an offense that as a 12-year-old having sex with a 13-year-old, was *younger* and therefore arguably a more likely candidate for the "victim" label than the 13-YO girl? Because he's a boy.

I am quite sure the Utah SC will find that the girl can't be charged as a "perpetrator" if the other "perpetrator" has already been found guilty of being such, since of course there can be only one perp and one victim and the two are mutually exclusive-- when talking about boys and girls, men and women. Otherwise sure, it's possible. They mentioned it in the article: dueling. And historically, who has engaged in such ill-advised behavior? Men. You can be sure if dueling had been the fashion among women, they would both be victims and their husbands or otherwise nearest male relatives would be held responsible.

Another issue here is just this: the criminalizing of youth. If people that young are diddling each other and adults don't like it, then adults are the only ones that should be considered to blame; the parents' duty is to oversee their kids, the younger those kids are, the more stringent the duty. 12 and 13? Too young to consider them self-supervising. Want your kids to stay virginal? Then keep your eye on them and teach them to behave-- or don't have them.

Judges and prosecutors really need to take their meds.

this is the sort of thing that happens when you throw words like fairness, equality, truth, logic and justice out the window. if a society no longer honors the precepts of law how can one expect a good outcome? dead trees do not yield good fruit.

Depending on what the kids did, maybe authorities should slap them both on their wrists and let the parents punish them (assuming the parents aren't spineless dip-wads..this is a situation where a firm father would be helpful).

Or if it was intercourse or something, they should be charged with a misdemeanor as minors, each the same charge, and sent to some kind of delinquency program. There should have already been a provision for this type thing in the law..considering it has probably happened hundreds, if not thousands of times over the decades (that is, the times where the kids involved WERE caught).

-ax

No, they shouldn't be involved at all. This is ridiculous.

This shouldnt even be news, it shouldnt be in the courts, this fucking country had gone straight down the crapper!!!

I wish someone would flush so I don't have to smell it any more.

The criminalizing of male sexuality by feminists -- "all heterosexual intercourse is rape" -- is starting to come home to roost in unexpected ways.

This is especially obvious due to the 3rd Wave feminists' "girls gone wild" raunch culture that sold women and girls (and men and boys) on the notion that promiscuity = liberation.

If feminist law has its way, then in a few years it will become necessary to redefine "rape" as entailing non-consensual penetration AND engulfment.

A vagina can be as much of a weapon as a penis, after all, within the feminist concept of oppression.

There are few feminists who have logically considered the end results that their misandry and sexism are creating.

Men can always just walk away from the tyranny of the gender wars, shunning all personal associations with women and with-holding their sperm and their wallets.

Seems extreme, but compared to years in prison or a lifetime of indentured servitude to the matriarchy....

As Dylan sang -- "A hard rain's gonna fall" ... and BTW ... "it ain't me babe!"

They turned to the government, but now the government is walking all over little girls, too. It's as if they've created a gigantic robot, invulnerable, bristling with weapons, but now they can't control it.

I agree with the comment that this shouldn't even be news. So two young kids fooled around... so what?! If it was consentual, how is that rape? And what kind of country tells you at what age you can become sexually active? Isn't that kind of an inhibition of freedom? This case should be dismissed. And BTW, I'm beginning to agree that marriage is an institution that is set up to enslave us. After all, if a man were to get married, then his wife cheated on him, she could still take half his stuff and the kids, whereas if the man cheated he wouldn't get jack. What a load of crap! Then, if you decide to not marry, and just pick up chicks at the bar for instance, they could accuse you of rape, and you'd be screwed even worse! It's almost worth a life of celebacy to never be this type of victim.

Evan AKA X-TRNL
Real Men Don't Take Abuse!

If you want to become informed about your particular state's rape laws, Google --

"(Your state) attorney general's office."

Then look up the specific rape policies.

You will quickly discover that in almost all states, a woman has 30 days after engaging in any act of sexual intercourse to (retroactively) decide if she was RAPED.

That's right; and that's the law. (And being married is not a safe haven from a rape allegation.)

Her subjective memory is all that your freedom depends upon ....

her word decides your condemnation, or your liberty.

30 days? She can "decide" years and years later that she was raped, even if she never had sex at all. And most people will automatically believe her, no matter how non-credible her story.

Catherine McKinnon has made statements which logically lead to the conclusion that she believes all heterosexual intercourse is rape. But I think she stops just short of stating this outright, because lots of women who unwittingly go along with her insanity, including people in academia, have sex with their husbands and boyfriends. She doesn't want to make such a volatile statement that just might get publicized, thus alienating millions of run-of-the-mill feminists.

Also I think it was Susan Faludi who said, "All men are rapists, and that's all they are."

-ax

Also I think it was Susan Faludi who said, "All men are rapists, and that's all they are."

All women are potential false rape accusers. And of course as we all know by now a false rape accusation is rape!

I forgot about that McKinnon bitch. She was a women's studies professor and a lawyer, right?

It's just that Dworkin was such a massive presence, both intellectually and in the bovine sense. (Google her photo and then go buy a widescreen monitor so you can see it!)

McKinnon wrote -

"All sex, even consensual sex between a married couple, is an act of violence perpetrated against a woman."

Hmmm. Wonder what happens to this idea when it's a married LESBIAN couple?

...and you are correct. I challenge you to find me one living woman on the face of this planet who has engaged in sexual activity of any kind who has also not lied about some or all of the sexual activity she was involved in. It's like oxygen to them, the recollection of the experience changes hour by hour, day by day with their mood. The same woman will often describe a sexual encounter to you at one point and then later describe that same sexual encounter to you at a later point with completely contradictory details. They don't even try to hide it because they know that however they wish to recall it at any particular second in time will be accepted as Gospel truth and the next time they tell the story differently (and the time after that and the time after that and the time after that...) will also be equally believed.

a woman merely has to randomly point at you in a crowd and make a claim of rape for you to be utterly and completely destroyed by the system. There is no avoiding it if the wrong woman points a finger at you.

I can attest to this first hand as the insane little bitch that falsely accused me or rape did so 10 years after the imaginary party that she claims to have been raped by me and others was said to have occurred. Fuck the bitch that accused me pulled a fucking Crystal Magnum years before that stripper whore ever got the idea.

I agree with everyone else - this should not be a matter for the police/courts at all PERIOD!

They BOTH agreed to what they did, they are not going to be "scarred for life" or "burn in hell" or "grow up to be rapist pedophiles" or "go insane or blind or turn in to insatiable nymphos" or any of that other nonsense that people spew out to try and scare kids out of having sex.

They've been doing it since time began, they'll do it until time ends and there is nothing anyone can say or do to stop it or even cause it to be less frequent.

Horny hormone filled early adolescent kids and teens are going to follow their urges regardless of the fear of god and consequences that adults who didn't get laid until they were in their mid 30's by some whore make up because they are sad they never got any in high school.

Paragon -- what you've so clinically described is called "Women's Ways of Knowing." (It's both a book title and a major feminist "theory.")

Basically, WWOK (pronounced wee-walk) is a revolt against the oppressive patriarchal logic of science.

It is the elevation of female subjectivity as the criteria for truth.

(Feminists call this "hegemony," unless it refers to their own power and control...)

Obviously, it's also infantile, strategic, pathological bullshit.

Powerful, legal, effective bullshit.

Go finish your Christmas shopping and you'll observe WWOK everywhere! ;-)

McKinnon is, or at least was, at Harvard.

Here's a quote from her in Myth of Male Power (p. 316):

"Almost half of all women are raped or victims of attempted rape at least once in their lives. ...Under conditions of male dominance, if sex is normally something men do to women, viewing "yes" as a sign of consent is misguided." - Catherine McKinnon, NBC's only choice to analyze the entire Clarence Thomas hearings as Tom Brokaw moderated.

She was, at least at the time, the country's leading feminist legal expert on date rape.
It also appears to me, that she is quite insane. Maybe her first boyfriend dumped her and she never recovered. Sometimes, that's all it takes.

-ax

Well, since McKinnon has defined all heterosexual engagement as violence, then it's perfectly logical within her legal reasoning to define even modest foreplay as attempted rape. (Any girl who let a boy feel her boob was "almost raped" ...)

Actually McKinnon could have increased the percentage to nearly 100%, minus the percentage of true lesbians who have never ever flirted with a man.

It's funny though to consider that today there are hundreds of thousands of married (to guys) women in their 40's and 50's who were self-proclaimed "lesbians" back in their college days.

They could switch back to the other team any day now, what with menopausal hormone craziness and no-fault divorce...