This actually makes some sense to me. An adult woman having sex with a boy is unlikely to do him any harm, unless she penetrates him in some way.

This actually makes some sense to me. An adult woman having sex with a boy is unlikely to do him any harm, unless she penetrates him in some way.
Are you serious? It's statutory rape. The harm is mental. The predatory nature of this woman as a child molester is the same as a man having sex with an under age girl. Your double standard is shocking.

Jdgalt's double standard simply reflects the facts of nature. I defy any man to seriously claim he would have been harmed, mentally or otherwise, if he'd been seduced by adult woman when he was in ninth grade. Myself, I wish I'd been so lucky.

Given girls mature faster than boys how does an adult man having sex with an underage girl cause more harm jdgalt?

. . . by an adult woman. Amy, is there any way you can give us the ability to edit our own posts?

Myself, I wish I'd been so lucky.

You and a LOT of guys, Rex, damn near every one I talk to!

Guys say they wish they had been that lucky, but...consider what kind of 30+ year old woman wants to have sex with a young teen, and what she wants out of it.

Sure, the guy will get to have sex, sex, wow sex!!!. That's great, the first time, maybe the second and the third. Once the charm has worn off, maybe he wants to go out with a girl more his own age, who (frankly) is probably a lot better looking in his eyes.

The older woman will be able to put all sorts of adult-level psychological pressure on the kid. This situation has at least the potential to become very, very ugly - and the victim will be the kid.

Here's a practical concern: Have you read the cases that have been in the news lately, about the 20-year-old finding out he has a six-year-old kid, because he is suddenly being hit up for 6 years of retroactive child support? He was "lucky" enough to have sex with an adult woman, when he was 14; she got pregnant, and has now fallen on hard times, so...

There is a reason that adults do not have sex with kids, in either direction. That's not to say that our laws aren't ridiculously harsh (on men), but they must be applied equally to both genders.

> Given girls mature faster than boys how does an adult man having sex with an underage girl cause more harm jdgalt?

You made that argument yesterday luj, and I liked it then as well.

I am not certain I agree with it, for the same reasons that like many people, I am still enough biased and bound to think like jdgalt, but I do like the argument, it is a very nice "made you think" comeback.

I think the question of whether it is harmful or not to either 14 year old or above girls or boys is requires just a lot more sophistication than society has in it right now. (Same thing with are some rapes worse than others, well tons of issues on rape).

In this case, the statutory part nicely and in ways I agree with removes the requirement for that discussion.

She's a teacher.
She fucked a student at her school.

She's a sex offender. Make her register. Take away her teaching credential, at least for middle and high school kids. If society dislikes that she now has to live under a bridge, or that sex registries are for life, or are far too broad, fine, I agree, let's demand they fix that.

If society dislikes that she now has to live under a bridge

I rather doubt that would happen. The most likely consequence of registering her would be a great deal of unwanted sexual attention from men (some listed on the same registry), which might be considered poetic justice.

I am very curious what jdgalt and Rex Little believe constitute "harm" and how whatever that definition might be somehow differs with respect to a 14 year old girl versus a 14 year old boy.

Children of that age are emotionally vulnerable and lack the sophistication to adequately negotiate a relationship with an adult... this lends itself to the fact that such relationships tend to be abusive in nature... even if it is just emotionally abusive because child doesn't have the independence or maturity to stand on equal footing with the adult who is taking advantage of them.

This whole notion of "wishing" to have been that lucky is a fanciful way of looking back as an adult and contemplating a scenario where you would be on equal emotional footing with an adult when you were still a child.

Sorry, but it doesn't work that way. Having your own fantasies is fine... but don't confuse your fantasy with reality.

Children in these situations are easily manipulated and controlled by the adults who are having sex with them... the relationships are inherently abusive in nature.

It doesn't matter how much the child might want sex either... that same child might want to get drunk and joy ride around town at 80mph as well... any adult who helps them achieve that goal is a criminal.

Anyone who believes that girls mature faster hasn't seen a trio of 23-y.o. "women" in front of a mirror.

Yeah, so where were these hot teachers when I was in school? All I ever had were near retirement age.

Anyone agreeing that adults fucking around physically and mentally w/a very young teenager is either a predator (a person who looks for other people in order to use, control, or harm them in some way) or obtuse.

A "relationship" of that type WILL distort the YOUNG teenager's ability to interact with his female peers. It's already going to be hard enough finding his way once he's an considered an adult so why put him in that situation just because he can get it up.

(I am not insulting anyone by calling them a predator as it simply one of the types of personalities that adults use to interact with others. If you are insulted then you need to grow a pair or not talk to adults about real life situations.

Acting as a predator would have certainly helped this young man out.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/goons-wanted-brazen-assault-young-couple-missouri-bar-article-1.1929944)

They should call this double standard the "Tea and Sympathy Exception."

I knew a 16 year old that had matured physically early. Beard and everything. He was able to get a fake id that said he was 21. So he would go to strip clubs and such. He got lucky enough to pick one that was also a hooker. So he went and fucked her (and lost his virginity). I ran into him like ten years later. He was regularly pursuing women that were 5-10 years older than him. He also had problems doing a committed relationship. The only thing I could think of is his expectations were warped by his first encounter.

Hmmm, let me see if I understand this correctly . . .

Party A (A for adult) has sex with Party M (M for minor). Some commenters here are saying because they "wished" it had happened to them when they were young Party A should not be required to register as a sex offender.

Did I get that right?

What if Party A is a wealthy man and M is a female who has always dreamt about "sugar daddies"? Would that make it okay?

What if both parties were gay or lesbian? And both parties "wanted" it. Does that make it okay?

Let me know if I misunderstood any of this - because it doesn't just sound like a double standard to me - it IS a double standard.

I'll paraphrase Dan Savage's "campsite" rule here: the older love partner has the responsibility to leave the younger love partner in as good a state before their relationship; both physically and emotionally - not leaving them with emotional or sexual baggage.

A 35-year old (of any gender) having sex with a minor half his/her age, by that very act, has enough of his/her own baggage that he/she will leave some of that baggage on the minor. In that I have no doubt.

What Artemis said.

Some commenters here are saying because they "wished" it had happened to them when they were young Party A should not be required to register as a sex offender.

Did I get that right?

No you didn't, not exactly. It's not that I wish it had happened to me, it's that adolescent boys in general are not damaged by seduction by an older woman the way adolescent girls are likely to be damaged by sex with an older man.

That's my opinion, anyway. Others in this thread disagree, and I don't have the time or the interest to debate the point.

(What about gays and lesbians? I don't have enough insight into their psychology to form an opinion.)

Rex Little,

I understand that you don't have the time or interest to debate the point, however I am honestly in the dark with what you are talking about when you say this:

"it's that adolescent boys in general are not damaged by seduction by an older woman the way adolescent girls are likely to be damaged by sex with an older man."

What does this even mean?

In what tangible way is the "damage" different?

How are you differentiating the "damage" or "harm" that takes place?

Are you talking physical?, emotional?... what exactly?

Your description is even a little off to me. The way you talk about it, the boy is "damaged by seduction" and the girl is "damaged by sex".

Are you insinuating that the difference is that the boy is in some sense damaged by the pursuit but the girl is instead damaged by the physical act of intercourse?

I'm trying very hard to understand where you are coming from and I honestly don't get it.

So far as I am aware, young boys who have been taken advantage of by much older women tend to have life long problems establishing stable romantic relationships.

They have difficulty negotiating relationships with girls their own age precisely because of their sexual experience with an older woman.

They also tend to have drug and alcohol problems.

It seems to me that these sort of outcomes constitute real damage.

Artemis:

I didn't mean anything by my use of "seduction" in one case and "sex" in the other; I was talking about the same thing in both: the act of sex itself (since that's the only thing which is illegal). My writing style got in the way of clarity, as it sometimes does.

For both boys and girls I'm talking about emotional damage, though for girls there's also the risk that pregnancy will cause physical damage.

I'm not aware of the tendency you describe among boys who've had sex with older women, but I've never looked for it. If it indeed exists, it's evidence against my view.

Rex Little,

Thank you for the response and clarification.

I did a quick search for an article you would be able to access if you were interested in reading up a little on this subject:

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1053&context=sociologyfacpub

This is an old article published in 2002 that reviews research that was done even prior to that.

This is what really saddens me about all of this. We have known for over a decade that the sexual abuse of adolescent boys and girls results in serious emotional trauma and for whatever reason it has failed to make it into the public consciousness.

Here is one relevant quote from the article:

"Garnefski and Diekstra (1997) compared 745 sexually abused boys and girls with a matched group of 745 non-sexually abused children ages 12–19 years on mental health problems including suicide in a large general population in the Netherlands. Sexually abused individuals reported more suicidal thoughts and suicide attempts compared to their non-abused counterparts. Gender interactions revealed that males who were sexually abused made significantly more suicide attempts compared to sexually abused females. No gender differences were found in suicidal thoughts and behavior for individuals who were not sexually abused (Garnefski & Diekstra, 1997)"

Many articles are referenced and the studies span many ages from very young children through adolescence.

I think the take home message though is clear that young boys are every bit as emotionally fragile as young girls.

Often times we like to think that isn't the case, which is why we often act like abuse doesn't phase boys as much as girls.

As a result sexual predators who target boys often get away with a slap on the wrist.

The important thing to keep in mind is that these are still children and real harm is being done.

Just based on the quote (perhaps the question would be answered if I read the full article), I have to wonder how, exactly, the authors defined "sexually abused." If they put all children who had sex with an adult in the "abused" category, the study is relevant to our discussion. If their definition required that the children were actually abused (regardless of the ages of their partners), it isn't.

Rex Little,

The article distinguishes sexual abuse from physical abuse and excludes studies of physical abuse in their review.

To identify the specific details in each study one would need to review those articles independently.

That being said, the fact that sexual abuse is considered to be distinct from physical abuse in such articles suggests that all cases of statutory rape would be included.

It is quite difficult to imagine the authors excluding statutory rape as counting as sexual abuse.

I have to wonder what Warren Farrell thinks about all this...

My guess is that he thinks that adults of both sexes in general SHOULD get a slap on the wrist. But I can't be sure.

This whole notion of "wishing" to have been that lucky is a fanciful way of looking back as an adult and contemplating a scenario where you would be on equal emotional footing with an adult when you were still a child.

Sorry, but it doesn't work that way. Having your own fantasies is fine... but don't confuse your fantasy with reality.

Posted by: Artemis at September 6, 2014 12:51 PM
________________________________

Reminds me of a different topic. In May 2013, Sylvia D. Lucas pointed out that, when you're over 50 and childfree, "wishing" you'd reproduced (or adopted), when you consciously chose not to do so decades ago, doesn't count as a real wish. All it means is, you now want the fun (of grandchildren, maybe) without the work. Unless you can truthfully say that you would happily change 1,000 diapers or more (plus a lot of other nasty chores) if you could turn back the clock, you don't really regret the choice you made.

You can read about that here:

http://sylviadlucas.com/2013/05/13/childfree-regret/

Great comments, too.

"(What about gays and lesbians? I don't have enough insight into their psychology to form an opinion.)"

It's the same for gays and lesbians as it is for straight boys and straight girls. If an adult willingly has sex with one, (s)he is a RAPIST. The gender of the student is about as relevant as hair color. End of story.

This is one of many reasons that I, as a man, see no problem with having sex with women as young as I can. Here is a woman that has sex with a middle-schooler without any ramifications - why, should a man be held to a different standard? Answer: He shouldn't. So in my book, if she is willing - she's on the menu. Plain and simple. Laws are BS when women are held to a different standard...