Syndicate
Special Thanks To...
The following organizations were early supporters of Mensactivism.org, and we thank them for their support. If you'd like to trade links with us, see our Mensactivism.org supporters page.
UK: Woman who had sex with schoolboy, 13, told by judge not to invite 'teen lads around for parties'
Submitted by Matt on Tue, 2018-07-31 02:14
Article here. "Just don't do that. No go on, off with you." It's unreal, but there it is. Excerpt:
'A woman convicted of having sex with a 13-year-old schoolboy has avoided a jail term.
And Jordan Lightfoot was warned by Judge David Hale not to invite teenage boys around for a party.
Lightfoot, of Edith Parc Rhyl, was found guilty of three charges of sexual activity with the 13-year-old boy, and also sexual activity by touching with a boy of 15, and causing or inciting the elder boy to engage in sexual activity.
She was 19 at the time of the offences and had sex with the younger boy at her home in the summer of 2016, a jury heard.
The offences came to light when the boy’s mother found text messages on his mobile phone.
After considering a pre-sentence report Judge Hale imposed an 18 month jail sentence, suspended for two years, with 50 days of rehabilitation activity.
A five-year sexual harm prevention order was made which bans Lightfoot from contact with boys aged between 11 and 16 unless inadvertent or with consent of parents who know about the conviction.
Lightfoot, who is the mother of a baby whose father is unconnected with the case, was placed on the sex offenders’ register for 10 years and must pay £140 costs.'
- Log in to post comments
Comments
He got lucky?
When news breaks of adult women consorting with boys that young, comments and reactions invariably include those who are inclined to shrug the whole thing off, say that the boy "just got lucky." But there is nothing "lucky" about something like this. Of course, minors have always pushed limits and experimented, but their sexual experiences should be commensurate with their age. If they are sexualized too early--especially with an adult, of either sex--it can be life-altering in a very negative way, and impair their ability to form future, loving relationships. People who react to these cougars porking young boys with "But he wanted it!" never say that, of course, when it's an adult man with a girl in her early teens. Who knows? Maybe she "wanted" it too. But that doesn't matter. The adult in these situations bears full responsibility, and statutory rape is statutory rape, regardless of the sex of the victim. But it shouldn't be surprising to see predatory women get off easy in cases like this, because it's easy to demonstrate the huge female "sentencing discount" in all criminal cases.
sounds appropriate to me
Wait... she was 19 and the boy was 13? I'm not sure I'm that outraged. She got a 18mo suspended sentence, and 10 years on the sex offenders list? That sounds fairly appropriate to me.
I think we on the MRM side of things need to not fall into the leftist trap of vengeful outrage when we don't get the scalps we think we're entitled to. I don't see this as being particularly different than the Brock Turner thing, where the punishment was also appropriate, but sent the left into a hissy fit.
Had sex with???
The media and the judge both exhibit an entrenched sexist approach to sex crimes against men and boys, indicative of an unchallenged culture of misandry.
You can't have sex with a 13 year old, it's sexually abuse or rape. The age of the rapist here is irrelevant so long as she is an adult. Last time I checked all adults are expected to know that sexually abusing children is a heinous power based crime.
It is very concerning that anyone could suggest that being 19 years of age either justifies or excuses sexual abuse.
19 and 13 are miles apart
Developmentally, 19 and 13 are a huge gulf. Do you recall being 13? Or 19? Even at 19 I knew fooling around with 13-year-old girls was off-limits.
At age 7 I had a friend's 15-YO sister directly solicit me to touch her breasts, etc., when no one else was around. At first I complied because I really had no idea what I was doing but after that I turned her down. At least it says something good about the girl that she did not attempt to force me to touch her further and after that she never tried again. Now 15 - 7 is 8. 19 - 13 is 6. Two years' difference. But further to talk about a difference of age between pubescence and pre-pubescence puts it on a different level. There is a distinction between pedophilia and hebephilia but in my case she was not fully a moral agent as Kant would define it so she gets some leeway; labeling her as a pedophile at age 15 is premature though feminists would say that about a 15-YO boy who did similar with a 7-YO child of either sex. Still, what she was doing she knew to be wrong esp. as she acted very much like it was "naughty" of her to be doing it.
One way you can tell that someone knows or suspects what they are doing is wrong and thus do have a culpable mental/moral state is if they go to pains to keep the fact hidden. This girl appears to have done that. She knew if she got caught banging a 13-YO boy that she'd be in dutch. And she was. Or at least, for a time. Now she gets off with a slap on the wrist. Oh I have no doubt her listing on the offender registry will follow her. But did she do any time? Would a man have done time?
To me, equality before the law is perhaps the biggest practical political problem men now have. Women are "more equal" than men in courts of law and this has to stop. The social issues are indeed bad and probably until they are better-addressed I doubt the legal issues will be cleared up because the status of men socially is what is driving the legal imbalance re the status of men in courts.
Actually 19 and 13 are 6 years apart
I'm not sure 13 is "pre-pubescent". That's just not accurate.
Don't get me wrong, I think what she did was inappropriate, and I agree that it should be a crime. I just think the punishment is roughly appropriate.
If the MRM are going to become the same sort of anti-sex, piteous victim whinging prudes that feminists are, I'm out.
The issue is the double standard
The issue is that women typically receive less punishment than men do for the same crime. So what's the appropriate punishment? The shorter sentences women receive or the longer sentences men receive?
One thing I know: feminists will protest a "light" sentence given to a man, but will never protest a "light" sentence given to a woman for the same crime.