More Double Standards
A Kentucky woman finally gets a short jail sentence of 60 days for raping a 15-year-old boy after school (thanks to the reader who emailed the story):
In an opinion piece from today's The Enquirer, the sentence is said to be a "slap on the wrist:"
Though this sentence is short and no doubt, a male who engaged in the same behavior would probably be in jail for years, I have to give Judge Bartlett some credit for trying to change the double standards a bit:
Some fairness is better than none.
Jeni Lee Dinkel will serve 60 days in Kenton County jail for having sex with a 15-year-old boy last year. She must also serve five years probation and register as a sex offender for the next 20 years.
Dinkel, 51, was sentenced today by Kenton Circuit Judge Gregory Bartlett. She was charged in April with having sex with a friend of her son during a four-month period in 2006.
Under the terms of the sentence, she must also undergo psychological counseling and substance abuse treatment. She will pay a $2,500 fine plus court costs. She must also serve 200 hours of community service and she is not allowed to sell her story or profit from the case.
She must begin serving her jail sentence Oct. 5.
The victim, now 16, did not attend the hearing but was represented by Joshua Crabtree, a lawyer with the Children’s Law Center in Covington.
“He felt during the course of the proceedings … there was some assertion that he had pursued Mrs. Dinkel," said Crabtree. "He wanted to make it clear that was not ever true.
In an opinion piece from today's The Enquirer, the sentence is said to be a "slap on the wrist:"
Kenton Commonwealth Attorney Rob Sanders initially agreed to a plea bargain that involved no jail time, saying a "societal double standard" made a long sentence for Dinkel unlikely. Judge Bartlett put a stop to that deal on May 31, saying he wasn't satisfied with the presentence reports and delayed the sentencing until Tuesday.
Dinkel's jail sentence will be only half as long as the four-month relationship she acknowledged having with the victim. She must also serve five years probation, register as a sex offender for the next 20 years, attend counseling sessions and perform 200 hours of community service.
Comments posted on an Enquirer online message board during the past few months have ranged from demanding the harshest sentence to some willing to excuse the crime because the victim was a teenage boy and therefore somehow must not have suffered from the experience. After all, this line of flawed reasoning goes, the sexual contact occurred repeatedly over months last year, so the boy must not have objected. The fact that this was the calculated seduction of a 15-year-old by a 51-year-old adult seems to be lost on these people. This was an act of domination and exploitation of the adult/child relationship.
Though this sentence is short and no doubt, a male who engaged in the same behavior would probably be in jail for years, I have to give Judge Bartlett some credit for trying to change the double standards a bit:
Dinkel pleaded guilty May 31, in a plea deal that would have given her five years probation and no jail time. But the judge in the case rejected the plea deal, saying he wasn’t satisfied with the pre-sentencing reports.
Bartlett said he had to uphold public confidence in the judicial system when weighing what sentence to hand down. “Equal justice is of the law is more than a slogan,” he said. “It has to be a reality, and as far as I’m concerned, it is reality.”
Some fairness is better than none.
Labels: men's rights
posted by Helen at 10:51 AM
65 Comments:
What part of "fifteen will get you twenty" is so hard to understand?
Some fairness is better than none.
Now see there, helen? Nothing to get so upset about. It's not like 15 year old young men are being raped left, right and center.
And locking up this woman will make the streets safer for all boys everywhere. I'm sure they're very grateful for you for using all your career might to protect them from such rapists.
Now, you think it's safe for people to let their boys out of the basements, or will they be victimized by the big bad world if we don't continue to look out for the boys and protect them?
Do you think this case shows the need for special protective status for boys? Or would it be better to teach our young men to say, NO means No, like we've drilled into our daughters?
I'm really not making light, just trying to provide a bit of contrast to those who see rapists of young 15 year olds everywhere.
Don't fear:
The boys are safe.
No need for special protections.
Carry on.
I am glad she is receiving some punishment: jail time, probation, fine, community service, and sexual predator status.
Take it from somebody who once was a 15 year old boy - the kid almost certainly did not feel exploited. It is much more likely that he got down on his knees and thanked God for his good fortune.
If you don't believe that, read Gender Differences in Receptivity to Sexual Offers co-written by R.D. Clark and E. Hatfield. (Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, Volume: 2 Issue: 1
ISSN: 0890-7064 Pub Date: 8/7/1989)
This is one area where I am absolutely comfortable with a double standard.
But bobh,
are you saying society doesn't benefit by locking this lady up, and the boy will do better for himself in life by not playing the victimcard?
What a concept! Maybe instead of treating our boys like girls in the victim department, we could start treating our girls like the boys: encouraging them to overcome and not cling to victimhood status for the rest of their life.
I agree with Mary.
Age of consent should be 14 and we should teach our children that they can make choices, and live with them.
Power differential? There are many ways for this to exist between sexual partners, and very few of them are illegal.
This seems like legislated morality, not rape. It may be distasteful, but that's no reason for prosecuting anyone.
There is a double standard, but to believe that this boy was some sort of unwilling victim is insane. That this was a "calculated seduction" is almost as nutty.
Oddly, one aspect of the double standard is assuming that fifteen year old girls who engage in sex with older men all all victims as well. The reality is that many fifteen-year-olds are very sexual (and always have been) and don't engage in this behavior simply because they find it "gross" (unless, of course, you are the current hot movie star, in which case the issue becomes one of opportunity, not distaste for having sex with someone thirty-six years older than you. And let's be honest, that's what gives most of us the heebie-jeebies; it would be like me having sex with an eighty-one year old woman. Sorry, that plane don't fly. Unless she's totally hot, then forget what I just said [but what are the odds of that?])
I'm pretty confident that, in fact, the boy hasn't suffered a whit from the experience. Unless he was raped, why would he? Are we really proposing that sex with someone thirty years your senior is traumatizing, but sex with someone your same age isn't? Isn't this all a rather perverted view of sex?
If a fifteen-year-old is truly ready to have sex--and many aren't--the age of the partner is highly irrelevant.
(Still, I'd set the age of consent at 16 nationwide. And reduce the drinking age to 18. I'd also make kids graduate from high school at least a year earlier--it would save money and most of high school is a gargantuan time waster.)
Joe and Barry:
Realistic assessments about the sexual lives of teenagers. Well needed in this discussion, for both boys and girls.
I also tend to agree with this, and sure hope it's true that this boy is not being continually told he is a rape victim forever: I'm pretty confident that, in fact, the boy hasn't suffered a whit from the experience. Unless he was raped, why would he? Are we really proposing that sex with someone thirty years your senior is traumatizing, but sex with someone your same age isn't? Isn't this all a rather perverted view of sex?
"She was wearing a short skirt, she wanted it." Mary, Bobh and Barry are pervin on the jailbait.
This whacko woman was stalking the kid. What 15 YO can deal with that? He would be reluctant to tell his parents or any other authority figure because, depite him maybe liking the sex, he knows that it is wrong and he might be in trouble or he doesn't want to get his grandma girlfriend in trouble.
15 year olds aren't equipped to deal with the responsibilities that come along with sex. period. My then 15 YO daughter was wanting all sorts of guys in her pants, so much so that I had to threaten to put a few in jail.
Just because a teenager wants to have sex doesn't mean that they should be allowed, you molesters in training.
My then 15 YO daughter was wanting all sorts of guys in her pants,
Sounds like you should do a little less preaching here about the realities of teenage sex, and spend a little more time parenting your little girl before she gets out in this wicked perverted world where guys would be more than happy to accomodate her request.
Of course, I'm getting mixed up on who the victim would be if your daughter invited a fellow classmate into her pants -- do you blame the boy, or the girl since we all know there always has to be a "victim" and a predator in these non-marital sexual relationships.
heh!
Wow! Just, Wow!
First, if you see nothing wrong with sex between a 15 year old and a 50 year old, you really need to take a course in Adolescent Psych. Take two -- I'll wait.
It's not the age difference by itself -- a 25 year-old and a 55 year-old doesn't bother me at all. No matter the gender.
And it's not pre-marital sex, either -- were the ages 18 and 15 I'd be rather understanding. Teens will fool around. And some "get in trouble," as we say.
But I really don't expect young teens to view the world in the same way as adults. And I (and the law) hold adults to a higher standard when dealing with minors. Because the adult predator has an unfair advantage.
I spent a number of years as a DCF / DFY / DSS volunteer. Exclusively with teens. If you think that many or most of them come to a physical relationship with an adult as their peer -- like the teen is some sort of "short adult" -- or that they look at anything in their lives in the same way that an adult does, I'm not sure what to say to you.
There are many strong reasons why we have the "informed consent." Which implies someone in their majority.
Does it fit everyone ? No. But it does fit most of them. And it wasn't created because folks were bored.
And it applies in medicine, contracts, and other places as well, so it's not just "about sex." It's about predation.
Hell, for a quick illustration, ask a 15-year-old to wait 2 weeks for anything. For many of them, it might as well be forever. They're not just acting -- their sense of time is not the same as adults. Nor is their impulse control. Nor their cognitive reasoning. See Erikson, Kohlberg, etc.
Not impressed with psychs ? Let's look to the Bard, a decent student of human behavior. In Romeo and Juliet, the two commit suicide when their love is thwarted. Yes, it's fiction, but if it were not credible, the story would not have stood the test of time. (And there'd have been no West Side Story, and a pity that would have been)
Now, suppose R&J were in their 30's ? Does the story still work ? Not likely, precisely because adults and teens see life in different ways. And we really know this, down deep. Is anyone really arguing that teens are not impulsive ?
For psycho-biology types, there are physical changes in the brain being mapped as well:
"As expected, areas of the frontal lobe showed the largest differences between young adults and teens."
http://www.nimh.nih.gov/publicat/teenbrain.cfm
I do hope, for the sakes of your integrity, that anyone who is nonchalant about the idea of this sexual encounter will at least support the same 60-day sentence for a 40+ year old male who has sex with a female. Because I know of no reason to not treat it the same.
That, at least, would be a consistency that our judicial system does not seem to have. Which is, I suspect, what bothers Helen (and me) about this.
I do agree that "over-victimizing" the teen is a mistake. Let him (or her, were that the case) get back to his life as soon as possible. While volatile, teens are also often resilient and can bounce back well.
But I'd toss the book at the perp. I'm tempted to say that she served only 60 days is precisely because of her gender, not because of the nature of the crime. But without NIJ stats from the area, I'm not confident in that. It seems that way, but I have no quantitative data to assert a man in the same jurisdiction would be treated differently.
Now, in New York, I know female child rapists (that's the legal definition, folks) get off easy compared to males. Matter of record.
Wow! Just, wow!
Your hypocrisy kills me. You mention sex between a 15 and 18 year old then state; "Teens will fool around. And some "get in trouble," as we say."
That pretty much makes the rest of your argument entirely bogus. If a fifteen-year-old is unprepared to have sex with a 51 year old, he sure as hell is unprepared to have sex with an eighteen-year-old let alone someone his own age.
The truth is, as I clearly stated some fifteen-year-olds are simply unprepared for sex. So are some twenty-year-olds. Others are ready. Some are even predatory; boys and girls alike.
(And legal definition does not rape make and I think the notion of "statutory rape" needs to be redefined. I know a fellow who at twenty-one married a girl of fourteen. She clearly was the pursuer. They didn't have sex until they were married. Was that rape? My wife's paternal grandmother was fourteen when her first child was born. She was married [and yes, the dates line up properly.] Was that rape?)
so essentially men cant be raped then, forced against their will (or knowing no better).
what a wonderful world to be a man in. men are always to blame for everything, men can be raped financially, and physically, and no one is bothered. men can be shot in the back of the head by his wife and she gets off early for murder. does that mean a man can do the same to his wife.. no..
i say again what a wonderful world to be a man in. no wonder male suicide rates are 4 times the females rates are. but thats ok all men deserve to die. (sarcasm off)
I have to agree with mercurior's sarcasm.
As a male survivor I've seen and talked with MANY other male survivors. The fact is that the odds are high that this boy will show major psycho-social troubles by the time he is forty. No one knows WHY, we only know that this is more often than not true and that the GREATEST and most VIOLENT compounding factor of all is the insanely bigoted attitude towards male survivors.
While I agree that many teens, boys and girls, get into relationships freely and agree that some will not be harmed, I must state loudly that most will show troubles later in life.
That is why we need to protect boys and girls. Most people want hatred for the boys: That hatred itself will cause problems for all males, survivors and non-survivors.
Dr. Helen: Something may well be better than nothing. However, with the size, scope and violence of the hate dumped onto male survivors of female offenders I think that nothing less than full equality will help. This 'something' will, I think, make the situation even worse by legitimizing the double standards (and hate) dumped onto male survivors.
While I realize that a lot of 15-year-old boys can happily have sex with an adult woman, and also know from experience that a 15-year-old girl can happily have sex with adult men, this particular boy did not sound very happy, and according to the article she did harass him in way that would inappropriate (though probably not illegal) even if he were an adult.
I don't think her punishment was insufficient though, and I don't think a man in the same situation should be punished more severely either. Ages of consent are arbitrary and I don't think there is any way around it, but IMO the punishment should be somehow proportional to the time left till the victim's age of consent. There is absolutely no sense in saying that a 16-year-old is fair game, but an adult having sex with a teenager the day before the teenager's 16th birthday is a horrible predator who deserves to spend the rest of his/her life in prison. If the age of consent is 16, having sex with a 15-year-old should be considered a rather minor offense, with a 14-year-old a more serious offense, etc.
One thing on double standards: the weirdest double standard that we have in regard to the sex between a minor and an adult is that on one hand the minor is not considered old enough to consent to sex, but on the other hand the minor is liable for the support of any children born from such sex.
As research on female sex offenders is in its infancy, I will be interested to see what researchers and professionals say in the future that leads to public debate--debate that will likely result in changes to the criminal justice system.
To all those "survivors":
Was the damage due to the intercourse itself or due to the societal reaction to that intercourse? There has been at least one serious paper presented at an American Psychiatric Association convention maintaining that the major damage is due to the societal reaction. Certainly demanding that the minor male "victim" pay child support to the adult female "criminal" is a misguided "societal reaction". I imagine that the kid is pretty embarrassed, but mostly because the women is 51 and apparently weird and desparate, and not 21 (or even 31) and hot.
First, if you see nothing wrong with sex between a 15 year old and a 50 year old, you really need to take a course in Adolescent Psych. Take two -- I'll wait.
Well, if sgt ted's daughter has a 50-year-old classmate, I'd say Daddy has a much bigger problem than worrying about who she's inviting into her panties!
Of course, I'm getting mixed up on who the victim would be if your daughter invited a fellow classmate into her pants -- do you blame the boy, or the girl since we all know there always has to be a "victim" and a predator in these non-marital sexual relationships.
Cmon... let's get real. Kids have pleasurable sex too, usually with classmates/each other. Instead of trying to police all the sexual desire in the world, why not teach your own daughters about who she should and shouldn't be sexual with?
Denial doesn't make her sexual desires go away. Teach her how to be mature in her needs, and not go around seeking older men to love, eh? That's a Daddy job.
Remember the LeTournea case?
Younger male, older woman. She served jail time, bore his children, and now they are married.
Betcha he didn't have anybody continually telling him what a victim he was, for going back again and again consentually to be with this woman.
I think bobh is way more credible on this topic based on studies, than some of the Puritans who think boys are being raped and kids don't have sexual feelings.
Joe,
First item:
We may disagree on opinions, but I'd contend that "the legal definition does not make rape" is wrong. It is precisely a legal definition. At least in any discussion of criminal proceeding like this one.
I do respect your belief that statutory rape should be defined differently. I may or may not agree, but I acknowledge that, "age of consent" is arbitrary (though legally binding) and there may be room for debate. And further that if the law in whatever jurisdiction is changed, future actions are not criminal.
Second item:
High marks for "boys and girls alike." It appears you want to make the changes to "age of consent" gender neutral. You have my respect -- not too many people want to do that.
Third item:
I'm not sure I made myself understood -- I really don't see hypocrisy in my position: My issue was not specifically with the teen in this case, and not even the quantitative years difference in ages, but with the adult and the specific ages involved. There is a qualitative difference between 15 and 50 that's rather unambiguous.
I specifically included the example of a 15 year-old and an 18 y/o because in that case there is room for ambiguity. I've known some 15 y/o's who acted "mature for their age", and some 18 y/o's with a lot of growing up left to do. My point in including them was that those ages may still have much in common in terms of maturity levels, subject to adjudication of the particular case. In other words, in this case, the 15 y/o may honestly be "having sex with someone his own age," at least developmentally. Informed consent is not just about about the 15 y/o, it's also about how culpable (if at all) the 18 y/o should be. The answer for the 15/18 case might be "not at all."
And I included it because I recognize that teens do have sexual desires. To some other posters: Let's not try a straw-man argument -- This is not about puritanism, it's about not excusing a predator.
An intimate and illegal relationship between a 50 y/o and a 15 y/o? Who, legally, should be held to adult standards in that relationship ?
My assertion was far less about sex than it was about informed consent. I'd feel the same way about a 50 y/o bank executive soliciting a 30-year variable-rate mortgage with a 15 year-old. It's still predatory. And if it's illegal, as statutory rape is, the 50 y/o deserves the full penalty of law, regardless of genders.
Next item:
Since someone mentioned Letourneau, let's take a look at this poster-child for woman-boy love. "Younger male ??" She had sex with her 13 year-old student. She gets got pregnant with his baby (I'm sure a 13 year-old can handle becoming a daddy -- it couldn't have affected his judgement at all.) She pled guilty to 2 counts stat rape 2nd. She is sentenced to 89 months. But -- sentence is suspended, instead she's ordered to 6 months in county jail and treatment. She gets released early from that, and is legally prohibited from seeing the boy as a condition of release. The next month she was found with the boy, her passport, cash, etc., apparently planning to leave the country with the boy and the baby. (Nope, nothing predatory or recidivist about this poster-child) . Her original sentence is re-imposed (no shock, when you violate the terms, even your gender can't protect you). But now she's pregnant with the boy's second luv-child. Nov 99, she winds up in solitary confinement for smuggling letters out to her now 16 year-old "boyfriend." Aug '04, she's released on parole. May '05, she and her boyfriend (now of legal age) get married.
If she's the poster-child for changing the age of consent, we won't ever agree on this subject. Using a case of a teacher having sex with a 13-year old student, and having two children by him, who ultimately marries her 8 years later as an argument to eliminate stat rape is rather, uhhhmm, unconvincing.
If you want to change the law, you're welcome to try. In some cases, we might even agree. Certainly, I agree with bobh that a 15 y/o rape victim (that's the legal definition) should never be forced to pay child support. There's a lot of screwed-up law out there. But I'm not supporting removing a minimum age from "informed consent."
As my wife (who is currently teaching human development) reminds me, our teen-aged son is not acting that way just to drive his parents crazy -- he's still trying to learn to think like an adult. And I'll ask her to get the Clark & Hatfield paper when she gets a chance. I know she'll want to see it if she hasn't already.
If she's the poster-child for changing the age of consent, we won't ever agree on this subject.
The point is... when the boy was of age and freely able to choose for himself, he chose to be with his "abuser".
No, but like the teen in this case who repeatedly chose to have sex with his teacher, you wonder exactly when he started considering himself a "victim"? Was it when society intervened, as the studies above have shown, or was he really being repeatedly raped against his will, as is being alleged here?
I think the teen will do much better for himself in the future if he's allowed to walk away without the "boy victim" label.
Any minor males I dealt with their parents or threatened to, depending on the circumstances. Over 18 YO I threatened to go to the police. I dealt with my daughter at home.
If she had been an adult going after minors I would have referred the matter to the police.
I don't play around when it comes to this. I have seen too many people irrevocably screw up their lives and the lives of children playing with sex, like it's no big deal.
"They're going to do it anyways" is the statement of an immature person who has failed to grasp the seriousness of the consequences, or sometimes it's the statement of a predator who wants to have access to underage persons for sex.
Protecting ones immature child from themselves is not the source of the problem. It is the responsible thing to do.
project much mary? You need to work out your sexuality and acting out issues with a professional.
1charlie2,
You stated that sex between a fifteen and eighteen-year-old is just fooling around while sex between a fifteen and fifty-year-old is rape and predatory.
This poses several problems:
1) It assumes that an eighteen-year-old is not acting in a predatory manner. This is dangerously naive since, in fact, the most predatory creatures are arguably between sixteen and, say, twenty-five years of age OF BOTH SEXES.
(Many of my nineteen-year-old daughter's friends got pregnant while minors. Superficially, the stunning part is how aggressive EVERY ONE of those girls was [in at least half the cases, I'm positive the girl got pregnant "accidentally on purpose."] I say superficially since I've never been under the illusion that teenager girls are innocent creatures.)
2) If eighteen is "naughty" but essentially okay, and fifty is indisputably bad, where is the transition point? Is twenty and fifteen okay? Twenty-five and fifteen? Thirty and fifteen? What about Thirty-one and sixteen? Or forty and eighteen? How about fifty and eighteen? (Know two successful marriages with those last two age discrepancies.)
My point is that once you give a green light for a fifteen-year-old to have sex, it is fundamentally irrational, and even hypocritical, to then use age discrepancy as a the problem. (I think most people are uncomfortable with large gaps in ages between couples and that this is what's at the core of the issue, not the younger person being fifteen.)
* * *
To clarify my position--I believe most fifteen-year-olds are ready to have sex, though not ready to be parents (most twenty year olds aren't ready to be parents and at 45, I'm tired of being a parent; thank God my youngest is almost twelve.)
I believe the belief that fifteen-year-olds aren't ready is even more infantilization of teenagers. (It's also deeply hypocritical--while most people have sex when they are sixteen or older, I believe most would have loved to have sex "with the right person" at fifteen if not fourteen.)
I also believe there is a lower limit. My gut instinct and based on interacting my own friends as a kid and my kid's friends is that fourteen is an absolute. Though there are a few--very few--exceptions.
From there it gets quite murky. I've known many fourteen-year-olds that are quite mature. But it's still the minority. While I believe most fifteen-year-olds are ready for sex, I'm willing to concede that maybe it isn't a majority, though still a large percentage. For this reason, I believe that erring on the side of caution, the age of consent should be sixteen with no other restrictions (and that the age thing many states have done is, for the reasons I stated, dumb.)
However, if an accusation of statutory rape is made (i.e. unforced sex between an adult and someone below the age of consent [again, I hate the loaded word rape--it not only doesn't mean what it sounds like, it reduces the potency of the word for what is genuine rape]) I strongly believe that the maturity and sexual aggressiveness of the younger person must be taken into account, regardless of sex. Furthermore, at a certain point of sexual promiscuity, the entire concept simply falls apart. For a fourteen-year-old who voluntarily has sex with just about anybody to cry "statutory rape" is simply absurd. (One of my daughter's best friends was extremely sexually active at fourteen and very aggressive about it. She tended to stick with kids her age and maybe a year older--but if she had suddenly gone to bed with a twenty-five-year-old, or even a forty-year-old, it would be utterly absurd to charge either with statutory rape.)
PS. The law in this case isn't going to change. Just look at the controversy in Hawaii of upping the age of consent. This issue has almost nothing to do with judging that actually maturity of teenagers, but in adults expressing their prejudices and the general "puritanistic" American discomfort with sex itself. It's also very much about the infantilization of society as a whole, but especially teenagers. I grew up in the 70s and hated it then and it's worse now.
BTW, one evidence of the silliness of the current state of age of consent laws is that they differ so widely by state. Are Hawaiian teenagers more mature than Coloradans.
Unfortunately, Sgt Ted expresses an all to common refrain--that teenagers are so immature and unprepared for society that we must "protect" them at all costs. That's just stupid.
Teenagers are much more mature than they are given credit for and would be even more mature if society didn't constantly tell them otherwise and prevent them from the experiences and responsibilities required to fully mature.
Kids from fourteen to eighteen are far more capable than adults given them credit for. Yes, there are "bad apples" but if you think that magically changes at eighteen, you are a fool.
Unfortunately, Sgt Ted expresses an all to common refrain--that teenagers are so immature and unprepared for society that we must "protect" them at all costs. That's just stupid.
Unfortunately, my daughter WAS too immature to handle her situations, so I had to step in. My son, not so much. YMMV.
So quit attributing this blanket attutude that assumes that I and other parents don't know whats best for our kids at their particular ages.
I agree that part of the problem is the infantilizing of teenagers. But most of what drives that is the LAW. Until that changes and parents can force their children to face reality by booting them from the home at that age when they know everything and are telling mom and dad "fuck you", nothing will change.
I am all for changing the law to allow and force more responsibility for teenagers. Just don't blame me because I have to deal with the teen culture created by the law and overly permissive societal attitudes.
Protecting ones immature child from themselves is not the source of the problem. It is the responsible thing to do.
Absolutely.
But blaming her male classmates when your daughter invited them into her pants, that's your problem bub.
Any healthy red-blooded man isn't going to protect your daughter from herself for expressing her desires. And you're threatening to jail them if they take her up on her offer? Well, let's just chalk it up to poor parenting where she went looking for some man attention outside the house. Nothing wrong with that. Sounds like she found herself a husband that fulfilled her. Excellent!
Hopefully your son-in-law isn't a weak whiner who tends to blame his troubles on other men or society, and can set a good example if he's raising a daughter of his own.
Because some of those threats you made when you daughter was asking for it? Could wind you up in jail today daddy-o, particularly if you laid your hands on those guys.
Unfortunately, my daughter WAS too immature to handle her situations, so I had to step in. My son, not so much. YMMV.
So quit attributing this blanket attutude that assumes that I and other parents don't know whats best for our kids at their particular ages.
What you're missing is the problem was with your daughter.
Not the men she was inviting to screw her.
Hope this helps!!
Until that changes and parents can force their children to face reality by booting them from the home at that age when they know everything and are telling mom and dad "fuck you", nothing will change.
Wow, you really screwed up early if your kid was out of control and disrespectful like that. You have to start EARLY demanding respectful behavior in the home first.
By blaming "permissive societal attitudes" on that kind of behavior from your child ... well, I'm starting to understand where this victimized mindset comes from.
It's always easier to point the finger of blame outward then to acknowledge you and your wife screwed up royally some where along the line if the kid got away with acting like that.
It's not society, it's you. Don't try to impose your outward "fix" on the rest of us because you can't even maintain control of your own home and children.
Discipline -- starts early, as young as toddler age. Let them know who is the boss, then step up and be there. I don't online diagnose, so I can't tell where you went wrong first, but by not having her accept blame for her actions -- by blaming male classmates or society -- I think that's a big clue why you're so unrealistic on this topic.
You are clueless mary. sod off.
what gives her the right to online diagnose?
some kids are mature, some arent, any sex with anyone under the LEGAL age of consent, is breaking the law, and should be punished.
whether they are 15 and 17.. admittedly some precocious children experiment, and the sexualisation of the teenagers due to inappropriate clothing, to inappropriate role models, like lindsey lohan, spears, hilton.
i am sure sgt ted did a great job bringing up his daughter, it could have been so different if he was permissive rather than the real father he seems to be.
i am sure sgt ted did a great job bringing up his daughter
Um did you, you know, read what he wrote:
My then 15 YO daughter was wanting all sorts of guys in her pants,
the home at that age when they know everything and are telling mom and dad "fuck you"
Yep. Sounds like he did a real bang-up job. Don't the daughters of all men act like this ?
/sarcasm off
A grandpa at 44?
Doh! That's not something that happens to all men, Ted.
Were you off serving your country when your children were being raised? That might better explain the "blaming society" part.
Good luck with the grandkids. Remember: early discipline, and encourge them to get educations. Boys and girls. You can break the cycle, if you work very hard at it and stop making excuses.
mary,
shutup woman and go make me a sammich.
Many teens want many things. You don't necessarily let them if you want them whole later.
Someone let you. Too bad. You turned out bitter and vile.
I don't online diagnose
Everything you've written is no more than you asserting an online diagnosis.
A grandpa at 44?
Doh! That's not something that happens to all men, Ted.
All? No. Unique? No.
If you have a child at 22 and they have a child at 22, you're a grandparent at 44. Is math really that hard for you?
All? No. Unique? No.
If you have a child at 22 and they have a child at 22, you're a grandparent at 44. Is math really that hard for you?
God, I love it when you dumb people try to "correct" what you're reading, not what I wrote...
Never said he was unique.
Yep, 22+22=44.
Did that math in my head too before I put up my comment.
What I wrote was "A grandpa at 44.
Doh! That's not something that happens to all men, Ted."
Which is quite true. A 44-year-old grandpa is hardly unique, but you must admit it's a rarity -- in ALL parts of the country. Seems to me they be making babies well before being fully educated, hence the "break the cycle" comments because he seems to believe what his daughter was getting away with at home was "normal" behavior. It's not.
Let's see... if she was 15, and your 22/22 estimate holds, then Pa was 37 at the time. Not blaming age necessarily, or his military background "you do as I say or else!" with little to carry it out. But the 15/37 dynamic surely contributes. Best to grow up and mature a bit before you jump into child raising these days. Society has changed like that where a 44 year old grandpa is a rarity. Usually in those cases of young parents, the grandparents end up raising them to get the job done properly. Luckily, he reports there's a stable man involved and his daughter appears to have gotten that sexual "acting out" out of her system.
----------
Many teens want many things. You don't necessarily let them if you want them whole later.
Someone let you. Too bad. You turned out bitter and vile.
You talking to me?
I never wrote that, so not sure who you're responding to. And I'm far from bitter -- fact I'm actually enjoying giving you fellas a "push" in the opposite direction of helen's letting you blame all your troubles on society. Take some responsibility man if you want to break the cycle. I suspect men nowadays know they have to physically be there if they want to shape how their kids turn out later. Damn shame so many of them are being sent on 3rd and 4th rounds in the MidEast, when their own children need them here for a job that could actually be accomplished. Just wait another decade or so when we see how all these military kids turned out with their fathers off serving a in a foreign country whose government is off for the summer, probably frolicking with their kids and teaching them right from wrong. Too bad it's these kids, and not the whole of society, bearing the sacrifice of spreading peaceandloveanddemocracy throughout the MidEast. Next time, maybe we stick to home, and not go trying to help folks who'd clearly prefer if we just stayed at home, raising our own kids in peace.
---------------------
Hey ted:
Go fix your own goddamn sandwich. Lol. Suddenly I understand why your daughter wanted out of the house so bad she was inviting strangers into her pants. Lol.
Let's just hope that son-in-law sticks around else I suspect you'll sign up for another tour yourself -- you know, to push the grandchild-raising off on society too. Break the cycle while you can, fella!
Hi joe.
You stated that sex between a fifteen and eighteen-year-old is just fooling around while sex between a fifteen and fifty-year-old is rape and predatory.
I don't think that's accurate, Referring to the 15/18 year olds, I wrote:
* 'in that case there is room for ambiguity. ' [emph. added]
* 'those ages may still have much in common'
* 'The answer for the 15/18 case might be "not at all"'
It's not fair to say I was ruling out predation in this case, merely that I didn't consider it patently obvious. So I wasn't holding the 18 year old blameless in every event. But I'm sure willing to hammer a 50-year-old.
OF BOTH SEXES.
Again, thanks for gender equality.
I've never been under the illusion that teenager girls are innocent creatures.)
I don't consider teens (either gender) "innocent" in the classical sense. I certainly wasn't pure as the driven snow. I consider them "naive" in the clinical sense, inexperienced, unable to contextualize as an adult. They may have the organs, and they may have the sex drive, but by and large I believe (based on considerable experience with them) that they are not thinking like adults.
Sex is not "dirty," and it's not "wrong" but it can evoke powerful drives, powerful emotions, and potentially explosive outcomes. It's not without serious consequences, some of which take a long time to arrive.
And we'll have to agree to disagree on the word "infantilization" as well.
I don't agree that saying that (for example) a 15 year-old doesn't look at sex (or the emotional attachments that may form in a hormone storm) like a 50 year-old is necessarily treating the teenager as an infant.
I let my sons start shooting at 6 years old (under supervision). I let them use the lawn mower (now) and other power tools without supervision. I am gradually increasing their level of responsibility toward they day they are on their own. That doesn't mean that the oldest is developed enough to understand the motivations of a pedophile and be able to understand when his own naivete is being exploited.
2) If eighteen is "naughty" but essentially okay, and fifty is indisputably bad, where is the transition point?
As I'd said, I acknowledge the transition is arbitrary. Many legal limits are. They may even be "incorrect." That arbitrary limits don't fit all cases is not necessarily an argument to abolish them. I don't always agree with every speed limit sign I see -- but I understand their utility. While one particular 15-year-old may be ready to take part in a particular activity, I'd argue that the idea that most are not is not automatically wrong.
My point is that once you give a green light for a fifteen-year-old to have sex, it is fundamentally irrational, and even hypocritical, to then use age discrepancy as a the problem.
As I said, you appear to think that I think that sex is the problem. Or that I give a "green light" to it. Both of those are not correct, and are a different topic for me. I merely seek a "level playing field," so to speak. And while a 15 year-old and an 18-year old MIGHT be on a level field, I don't think a 50 y/o and 15 y/o are.
(I think most people are uncomfortable with large gaps in ages between couples and that this is what's at the core of the issue, not the younger person being fifteen.)
Possibly true for many people. But as I said in my earlier post, I don't care about a 25 year old and 70 year old. Or a 25 y/o and a 95 y/o. The 25 y/o is legally an adult and can take his/her own chances.
I also believe there is a lower limit. My gut instinct and based on interacting my own friends as a kid and my kid's friends is that fourteen is an absolute. Though there are a few--very few--exceptions.
Pardon me, are we having an argument over the specific age of the teen ? As in, 14 vs 15 ? In that case, I really failed to make my points at all.
[again, I hate the loaded word rape--it not only doesn't mean what it sounds like, it reduces the potency of the word for what is genuine rape]
I feel differently. It's a different kind of crime than physically-coerced. But then strong-arm robbery is different from armed robbery. Both are wrong. And I think when an adult deals with a minor, not all the disparity of force is physical.
For a fourteen-year-old who voluntarily has sex with just about anybody to cry "statutory rape" is simply absurd.
The teen doesn't cry foul, I do. Or the law, acting on my behalf, does. Put another way, that there is a bunch of litter on the ground already does not excuse someone who tosses another beer-can out. It's still litter, and it's still wrong.
Oh, and I'm only uncomfortable with sex if it's done wrong :) But that, too, is another topic.
Cheers!
mary,
The point is... when the boy was of age and freely able to choose for himself, he chose to be with his "abuser".
Well, this by itself may indicate he wasn't abused. Or, it may indicate that he literally doesn't know better. As an extreme example of this (only relevant as an exemplar analogy), many abused children fight against being separated from a physically-abusive parent.
I am SO not equating the two.
But I am saying that "s/he doesn't know any better" is sometimes true. And if it is true -- and I think it was in the case of LeTourneau -- the law has a duty to act.
There are times when a child or teen, left to themselves, will choose a terribly self-destructive act. In that case, I think that LeTourneau's victim was confused, and the worse for the experience.
I think the teen will do much better for himself in the future if he's allowed to walk away without the "boy victim" label.
Agreed, to the extent that we can do that without losing sight of the crime that was committed against him.
I don't think that an adult rape victim should spend the rest of their life as "that poor girl/boy" either. But that must be separated from the need to prosecute the offenders.
Otherwise, we are begging for recidivism.
cheers.
Seems to me they be making babies well before being fully educated, hence the "break the cycle" comments because he seems to believe what his daughter was getting away with at home was "normal" behavior. It's not.
You are a snotty arrogant piece of shit. How dare you criticise my life. Just who the fuck are you? You know nothing about me. Nor do you know shit-all about how my daughter was acting out, nor why she was the way she was during her "difficult years". But I do.
I do because I lived it, I paid the extensive psych bills and have come thru the other side producing a strong willed, take no bullshit daughter who has had 3 beautiful children of her own, much to our delight.
That you infer that because she had babies before she completed her education that she is some sort of defective or there is some negative "cycle" that needs to be broken shows just what sort of moral retard you have made of yourself. She is continuing her education a class at a time and raising her children. You know, like plenty of other people who lift themselves up. Strong independent people, men and women who don't sneer at those who've had it a bit tougher and engage in homophobia by calling them girlymen instead of listening to what they've been thru and showing some compassion. We've been in tough spots as well and can relate.
Can you? Or are you just too much of a narcissist?
You sound just like the feminazis in the 7's who used to look down on women who had kids instead of having a career. They were bigots then and your a bigot now.
So, step off. You are a clueless tool.
You are a snotty arrogant piece of shit. How dare you criticise my life.
Look maybe if you don't want people to have opinions and comment, you should have respected your daughter's privacy and not aired her dirty laundry here.
And it's really nothing to be boastful about -- Grandpa at 44. In fact, there's something kinda sad about it, particularly what you chose to reveal about your child.
Let this be a good lesson to you? There are a lot of assholes out here and you really should take care, respecting your child's privacy if not your own.
You sound just like the feminazis in the 7's who used to look down on women who had kids instead of having a career.
Dunno. Wasn't around in the 7's. But if you read the other thread, you'd see I was actually defending stay-at-home parents from the victimized males who seem to absolutely HATE the women who choose this option. Real feminazi, eh?
-------------
She is continuing her education a class at a time and raising her children.
Yeah, so think about it. Those kids are being raised by an uneducated mother who not long ago was inviting strange men into her pants. Just pray that the son-in-law sticks around, and keep a close eye on how those kids are being raised, eh?
Sometimes overwhelmed, uneducated parents in these times don't make the best decisions. 3 already, huh? Sounds like she didn't get much information on birth control or family planning at home, eh? Maybe just threatening to jail the boyfriends didn't turn out to be the best parenting strategy in the world, eh?
Let's hope the grandkids get a little more education and a little bigger peek at the world before they get themselves or a girl knocked up, eh? Sounds like from your response, that's what brought about the marraige, eh? Shotgun wedding with daddy threatening jail?
Really education, and break the cycle. You do want better for them, not to be blaming society for their troubles years down the road, no?
As an extreme example of this (only relevant as an exemplar analogy), many abused children fight against being separated from a physically-abusive parent.
Which is perfectly logical if you think about it.
A recent study in fact confirmed that the good majority of children are better off staying with even a physically abusive parent (with society intervening for treatment) than being dumped in the hellhole that is fostercare in so much of our country.
Better to stick with the "abuse" you know than to court sexual abuse, labor exploitation, or risk being locked up/starved/beaten by somebody being paid for your welfare. The State for the most part should get out of the game of splitting up families, particularly when the alternative is so risky.
Which is exactly why if we really were there to help the people of Iraq, we would have gone in got the job done and gotten out. It's not about the people of Iraq, just like often, it's really not about the best interests of the kids.
Reality can be unpleasant like that, which is why it's sad so many choose to blindly believe in the power of purple finger paint. It's the kids, not the cheerleaders, who are paying the price. You'd think they'd at least have the courtesy to shut up and stop beating their chests at this point...
"I think the teen will do much better for himself in the future if he's allowed to walk away without the 'boy victim' label."
Agreed, to the extent that we can do that without losing sight of the crime that was committed against him.
I don't think that an adult rape victim should spend the rest of their life as "that poor girl/boy" either. But that must be separated from the need to prosecute the offenders.
Otherwise, we are begging for recidivism.
------------------
Well put. I don't think that when something bad happens to you, it automatically makes you a "victim". It's how you choose to think about yourself, and how much you choose to work for better rather than wallow in your victimhood. I wish more people could acknowledge that "victims" need understanding much more than they need unproductive sympathy that doesn't let them move forward but ties them every day for life to that particular incident, particularly when there are no long-lasting scars that can't be healed. (see the Duke "boys").
The absolute worst thing you often can do for a "victim" is to introduce them to the blame game, where everything that consequentially goes wrong in their life is someone else's fault. Recipe for a ruined life right there. Makes the therapists rich though.
It's like they might really mean well (think Iraq) but they just can't seem to acknowledge the consequences of their actions, and how much this kind of "help" really just works to double the victimization.
Wait, I just did the math.
If he's a grandpa of 3 at 44... damn, any chance you were in your 30s still when that first one popped?
Now that would be something unique!
mary --
No you didn't.
One has a child at 20. Child has offspring at 20, 22, 24. Three grandkids at 44. Do the math again.
Not unique.
You make huge leaps of logic and assumption mary. All to the negative. Or to that which doesn't comport with what you see as "normal". You must've been raised in a cave to hold such narrow views. Not all intelligent people subscribe to your particular bigotries mary.
Having kids before college(if one chooses college at all) isn't a negative thing. I find it strange that you would think so. Maybe you need to break the cycle of pomo femigrrrl fashionable cultural bigotry that makes you worship attendance at Academy over having a family, or that thinks having a family without first going to college is wrong. What an idiotic way of looking at life.
I thought feminism was about freedom of choice in ones life decisions.
One has a child at 20. Child has offspring at 20, 22, 24. Three grandkids at 44. Do the math again.
Lol.
But note grandpa never answered the question. First you plucked 22/22 out of the air, now you choose other numbers. I'm suspecting my assumption was correct, not that there's anything wrong with that.
Maybe you need to break the cycle of pomo femigrrrl
I'm not even sure what this is. Seems like you're up on the grrrl's talk -- maybe your daughter taught you some thing I don't knew?
Read the other thread where I was defending those "victims" where were choosing not to attend "the Academy" right out of high school. I suggested most of those who don't go don't see themselves as "victims" and rightfully so.
It's your hostess here who's rounding up those who find more active pursuits at that age, and trying to convince them that discriminination in the "academy" is keeping them out. I laugh at such victimization talk, understanding why some choose not to go.
I still think that military thinking skills: "You do this because I rank above you and I say so" aren't so great for parenting. And you were kind enough to offer up your child's experience on this thread, with you as a father.
You try to justify that all kids go through a stage like that. Maybe kids raised without true thinking skills like a continuing education affords, whose parents think they just have to give orders and that's that.
Listen, I don't mind what you think or how you raise your own. But when you go around attacking strong thinking women as "grrrls" whatever the hell that misspelling is, or label them as man-haters, well me and my friends are going to get a kick out of that, "old sarge." Your ways in society are not for everyone, and we're not in your military. So back off with the domineering attitude, because you seem to crumble when somebody call you on your stupidity and argues right back at you. You're not prepared for that, because you start name-calling and shutting down discussion, just so absolutely convince that males are stronger than females in all fields and we should know our place.
You lose.
Again.
Get them grandkids some education and a little look at the bigger world first, or else they'll probably overestimate themselves like you...
And blaming your daughter's promiscuity on the guys who would take her up on her offer ... that's pure bad thinking and victimization of males. Geez, never considered you were batting for the "grrrrls" team on this one, eh?
sgt ted,
Earlier in this thread you stated "15 year olds aren't equipped to deal with the responsibilities that come along with sex. period." I was responding to that blanket statement since I certainly agree that every child is unique.
My own four children are so different from each other it can be rather startling.
My oldest daughter (now nineteen) was ready for sex at 15 (she lost her virginity at 14, though has been much less sexually active than many of her friends since--her latest boyfriend made an offhanded comment recently that led me to believe they aren't having sex [just a minor curiosity; it's her life, her choices.]) My sixteen-year-old son is ready for sex, but has chosen not to in spite of pressure from his girlfriend (he also doesn't drink or use drugs--my wife and I are teetotalers, but have never really emphasized this. However, few in my extended family or my ancestors were ever big drinkers so it may also be something genetic.)
I hoped I made it clear that every person matures at a different rate. I still believe most fifteen-year-olds are ready for sex, but few a ready for parenthood.
I will disagree quite strongly with Mary that the correct way to parent is to discipline early and often. Clearly she isn't a parent. Some children respond readily to discipline, others don't. From soon after she was born, my oldest daughter called our bluff. In all seriousness, she figured out that parents could only go so far. By nine, she quite candidly told us that to our faces.
Contrast that to her little sister. To discipline my youngest you just have to glare at her. The two boys lie between these extremes.
(As a side note, Mary, what's with the antagonism toward marriage and children? As sgt ted said, isn't the entire point of feminism that women HAVE A CHOICE?)
This comment has been removed by the author.
BTW, Mary, I don't actually disagree that for most people waiting to have children is probably best. It's a heavy personal and financial responsibility. However, it is still a choice a [couple] has to make for themselves. Hopefully, they will also be honest with themselves about their own capabilities. (Something I didn't do, largely due to my religious indoctrination growing up. In the abstract, were I to do it all over again, I'd have two children very quickly and that would have been that. Understand, that purely hypothetical since I wouldn't give up my two youngest for anything, especially since they are a sea of calm and sanity by any measure, let alone compared to their oldest two siblings.)
mary --
No dearie. I'm just showing you that it's easy to have three grandchildren by 44 and that your comments are no more than an attempt at a put down.
My use of different numbers was to further show you that even a planned family by people who wait until adulthood can result in the same. Note the two year spacing.
BTW, he doesn't have to answer a personal question from a troll.
just because someone can do something, doesnt mean they should be allowed too.
i know at 16 my hormones was racing, i would have gone for any female, regardless of age. but it was wrong in the world i grew up in.
having a child at 15 will not only ruin the mothers life, but the fathers and the child.
i knew a great grandmother at age 48, she wasnt best pleased.. just because you can doesnt mean you should
I have been down both roads raising children; one with a difficult kid and one with one of those (almot)perfect children one is occasionally blessed with.
If mary was interested in a frank discussion about family dynamics, I might answer her questions. But she is not. She is merely looking for more fodder to talk her ignorant shit and put me and those I love down. She obviously hasn't comprehended what I have said, she merely has inserted her own predjudices in between my words and projected her own weird strawman to beat up in my stead.
She is welcome to her ignorance. But I won't put up with her ignorant lectures on how my family should have been raised. Her blanket, pat answers about child raising are like Military Plans; they become obsolete as soon as they come into contact with reality. I am talking the realities that went thru. She is talking boilerplate. She even thinks that I took no action in disciplining my daughter. What an idiot she has shown herself to be. She even falls back on feminist tripe like how I can't handle strong women. More ignorance and projection.
Notice a recurrent theme: Her ignorance.
Like I said mary; step off. I don't answer to you. You have nothing useful to say to me.
yes i agree, i am childfree, i dont want kids myself, because i see personally the bad outweighs the good in my case.. good kids are a pleasure, bad kids are a nightmare, and thats to a stranger, let alone a parent.
but i have friends with kids, and lots of family. and i understand how hard it can be.. and i do applaud decent parents like you. who try their best.
will disagree quite strongly with Mary that the correct way to parent is to discipline early and often.
You discipline early and often if your family values include no sex at age 14, and no telling mom and dad to Fuck Off in their own home.
I'm one of these "My Roof. My Rules." thinkers. You want to do better? There's the door. Sometimes they take you up on it, and find out it's a tough world out there. Sometimes they stick it out findng friends and society subgroups, sometimes they decide it's better to come home and play by the rules. (this happens at 18 btw. Under that age, the parents are in control, period.)
If you start with the discipline from toddlerhood, the kids understand that 18 is the magic age, but they've got to play by the rules until then.
That's wonderful that your daughter is mature enough at 14 to pleasure others. I'm glad you don't have the sgt's attitude against her sex partners. Absolutely when and if to have children is a choice. But if you're physically threatening her sex partners, you're still not mature enough to parent and probably should have waited until you could do a better job, so your undisciplined child (or her father) doesn't go messing up lives.
Other than your military salary,
were any of these young-bred children or grandchildren reliant on public funds like AFDC or WIC nutrition programs?
That happens a lot with young parents starting out, somebody else subsidizes their head start.
She even falls back on feminist tripe like how I can't handle strong women.
Feminist tripe? Hey it was you bringing up the "grrrrl" talk, not me. I really would have though the military would have taught you the value of discipline. Go figure.
Ladies - you can't rape a 15 year old boy.
True, an adult woman who will bed a 15 year old boy is pretty messed up (for a variety of reasons).
But, I, as does the gentleman far above - have the advantage of having been a 15 year old boy.
If I had been fortunate enough to run into a generous woman like this - I would have gotten down on my knees and thanked my lucky stars.
If there is any abuse here - it is telling this kid he's been raped - all you're doing is confusing him.
navyvet -- Would you say the same about your randy 15 yr old daughter? As long as it was consensual?
Mary Said: "Now see there, helen? Nothing to get so upset about. It's not like 15 year old young men are being raped left, right and center."
Chris Key Says: According to the U.S. Bureau of Justice, less than 1% of American women are raped per annum. Therefore, should American women and feminazi's from the U.S. "not get upset" when rapists aren't incarcerated?
Mary Said: "And locking up this woman will make the streets safer for all boys everywhere. I'm sure they're very grateful for you for using all your career might to protect them from such rapists."
Chris Key Says: Your question is rhetorical and provocative, so I can understand if Dr. Helen chooses to evade it.
Mary Said: "Now, you think it's safe for people to let their boys out of the basements, or will they be victimized by the big bad world if we don't continue to look out for the boys and protect them?"
Chris Key Says: If you hadn't have added the question mark to the end of your statement, then it would have been a straw-man argument.
Mary Said: "Do you think this case shows the need for special protective status for boys? Or would it be better to teach our young men to say, NO means No, like we've drilled into our daughters?"
Chris Key Says: You're right, young men should be taught that they don't need to have sex with any and every woman that comes up to them. The problem is a lot of feminist-indoctrinated persons and will call a man an "arsehole" if he says "no" to a woman. I have heard of cases where women have mutilated the genitalia of young men because the young men turned them down.
Therefore, it would be a good idea to teach boys and girls that "no means no" and that no one has the right to abusive when they are turned down.
Mary Said: "I'm really not making light, just trying to provide a bit of contrast to those who see rapists of young 15 year olds everywhere.""
Chris Key Says: That is a straw-man argument, as you're misrepresenting the argument used by MRA's and anti-feminists on the aforementioned issue.
Mary Said: "
Don't fear:
The boys are safe.
No need for special protections.
Carry on."
Chris Key Says:
No one said that boys need special protections.
Oligonicella -
Would I say the same about my 15 year old daughter?
Well, she's 31 now - and the answer is no. An adult male might not have survived bedding my daughter.
I didn't have a son, so I can't test the reverse - but I'd probably have patted him on the back and complimented him.
navyvet,
Your argument that it's okay for a woman to have sex with a 15-year-old boy is based on the premiss that 15-year-old boys want sex from women. Well, 15-year-old girls want sex from men. Therefore, does that mean it is okay for a man to have sex with a 15-year-old girl?
Since your argument is logically fallacious due to its contradictory stance on what's okay for boys and girls, we can assume that you're basing your argument on emotion.
What it comes down to is a lot of fathers are obsessed with their daughters. Those type of fathers want their daughters to admire them and only them, and not think about any other man or boy. It's a form of jealousy and selfishness on behalf of the fathers, as they are scared that their daughters will stop thinking thinking about them. The result is they chase all men -- and some times boys -- away.
I am not saying that it's okay for a man to have sex with a 15-year-old girl. What I am saying is the hypocritical stance that some men have on the issue is a byproduct of them wanting to be the dominant man in their the eyes of their daughters.
NIce twist on Freud.
So a 15 year old boy is equal to a 15 year old girl??
Not in the real world. Because the perp is different.
You don't have to worry about the boy getting chased by adult women for sex - it just doesn't happen that often.
Just a straw vote - how many men out there ever even got a second look from an adult woman?
But they make whole TV shows about adult men going after adolescent girls.
Which is why, Freud or not, men make it plain to other men to leave their daughters alone.
85cc免費影片85cc免費影片sex520免費影片免費 a 片85cc免費影片台灣論壇免費影片免費看 aa的滿18歲影片85cc免費影片線上觀賞免費Ａ片線上免費a片觀看a片免費看小魔女免費影城A片-sex520aaa片免費看短片aaaaa片俱樂部sex888免費看影片sex520免費影片sex免費成人影片馬子免費影片免費線上a片成人圖片區18成人avooo520sex貼片區臺灣情色網線上免費a長片免費卡通影片線上觀看gogo2sex免費 a 片sex520免費影片援交av080影片免費線上avdvd免費 aa 片試看,成人影片分享後宮0204movie免費影片免費線上歐美A片觀看sex888影片分享區微風成人av論壇plus論壇自拍情色0204movie免費影片aaa片免費看短片免費色咪咪影片網aaaa彩虹頻道免費影片日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞85cc免費影城5278論壇倉井空免費a影片bbs x693 com sex888a片免費觀賞sexy girls get fucked吉澤明步彩虹頻道免費短片sex520-卡通影片台灣情色網無碼avdvdaaa影片下載城彩虹頻道免費影片 sex383線上娛樂場一本道 a片 東京熱情色影片彩虹成人avdvd洪爺影城高中生援交偷拍自拍限制級色情 片
視訊做愛視訊美女無碼A片情色影劇kyo成人動漫tt1069同志交友網ut同志交友網微風成人論壇6k聊天室日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞UT視訊美女交友..........................
080苗栗人聊天室女同志聊天室sex女優王國080中部人聊天室ut視訊聊天聊天室ut尋夢園聊天聯盟聊天同志聊天室a片卡通ut影音視訊聊天室13077ut女同聊天室免費視訊聊天上班族聊天室免費線上成人影片新浪辣妹視訊情人視訊網ut 聊天室聊天室找一夜中部人聊天室
Post a Comment
<< Home