KO Traveling Hobo
Member
Unless my understanding of the term is off, doesn't the existence of "statutory rape" imply a distinction between 'rape' and 'rape rape?'
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Eighth grade teacher 'caught in bed having sex with student, 15, by 12 y-o brother'
- Thread starter ComputerMKII
- Start date
- Status
BakedPigeon
Banned
By law, statutory rape, yes.
Rape is having sex with someone without the legal definition of consent. "Statutory" specifies that consent couldn't be given because of age. Still rape.
KO Traveling Hobo
Member
Ah, my mistake.
What's the MAJOR difference? Give me all the gory details.
for once the student didn't say anything. what a horrible little brother.
i found it funny that she used "hola" and a few other words to trick him too. but the kid is pretty smart.
i think they should let it slide. she didn't rape anyone. but of course the laws says something else i guess
i found it funny that she used "hola" and a few other words to trick him too. but the kid is pretty smart.
i think they should let it slide. she didn't rape anyone. but of course the laws says something else i guess
Anton Sugar
Member
What the hell are you talking about? Please explain the MAJOR differences.
you addressed raping a girl and 'raping' a guy but what are the differences between a guy 'raping' a girl
(note the scare quotes)
I just thought of it, but there is a slight logical difference in guys and girls in cases like this. Childbearing and childbirth is (pretty rightfully) a mother's sole decision. She has to make the choices at every point after conception. The guy can have a say, but for the most part the law sides with the woman (again, rightfully). With an overage girl and an underage guy if she gets pregnant things are kind of on her. In this case she could logically decide to keep the baby or not. In a case like this she's got a good job and she could likely afford the kid and would be fine with raising it. When you flip the situation things get a bit muddier. The girl could have a much harder time with school, and if she keeps the baby she's really not in a situation to be able to take care of it herself, almost without exception. If she doesn't keep the baby that just adds another life altering decision that she's likely too young to be making.
Anyway, both situations are definitely wrong, and the double standard as it exists is still too stark despite the muddiness, but I just thought of that and wondered if people thought that might be a small chunk of the double standard, too.
Count Dookkake
Member
Eh, not really.
"Statutory" only means that something is declared by statute. It is declared by statute that children can not give consent in a legal sense. In reality, children can consent to whatever.
So, Whoopi was kinda right and kinda wrong. Right in that there is a difference between rape and "rape rape." Wrong in that the difference didn't really matter in the Polanski discussion.
That argument has to do with adult rape most of the time. Unofficial terms all of the time like drunk date rape vs forceful rape.
No, I'm not one of those people.
The definition of statutory rape describes consensual sex with a minor. If you think it's equal to forcing a kid to have sex, there's something wrong with you.
They don't fear the repercussions. Institute something extreme like a death penalty and watch in amazement as this sort of thing ends.
Slurpy2k20
Member
Yeah, just like there's 'theft', and 'theft, theft'. Stealing a dollar from a loonie jar, and scamming a family for their entire life savings is an identical crime, with equal victimhood, because they're defined by a 5 letter word. What a genius you are.
You seem to be one of those people that refuses to think rationally, and loves throwing millions of different situations into a specific definition, then pretending all these situations are completely identical, then mocking anyone who suggests otherwise. Yeah, much more logical. A man kidnapping a girl and forcing his penis into her vagina while she's balling her eyes out and possibly causing her real, long term physical damage, not to mention the possibility of getting pregnant and the fucked up decisions that need to be then made because of this, on top of all the psychological and emotional stuff is EXACTLY THE SAME as a woman letting an underage kid fuck her in a consensual way. You're right, the amount of victimhood in both these cases is IDENTICAL, Because we can use a 4 letter word to arbitrarily define both of them, never-mind the actual facts of and context of both scenarios.
BakedPigeon
Banned
And its not even fucking rocket science to make the distinction between the two.
Anticitizen One
Banned
Every time I hear these stories I feel like my childhood was a failure
MoogleWizard
Member
Oh, there isn't? Is that why there are so many posts in this thread completely downplaying what she did to the point of it seeming like it's not a bad thing at all ("lucky kid" and so on)?
The general consensus here seems to be be that he wasn't forced to sleep with her, but had he been a girl and the teacher a guy the reactions would be different, although it would've been the same thing. Do you think there'd be posts saying "lucky girl" had it been a girl that wanted to sleep with her teacher instead of a boy?
so do you think we should have different laws for boys and girls?
(i am asking you sincerely)
Okay, but is that 'rape' or rape? Or "rape"?
statutory rape is the biggest fucking misnomer of all time. It's rape if there isn't consent. If they're not old enough to understand what they're consenting to (which is hard to determine for mid-adolescents), it's exploitation of a minor by a trusted adult. There are other things people call statutory rape that I don't agree with, but that's for other threads.
He will never recover from all the high-fives he will get from his friends.
That's Rape. You forgot the capital R. You can tell cause his hypothetical girl is crying.
The situation with this boy obviously is "rape". It calls for air-quotes cause you know, it's not like its Rape.
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
Enjoy the prison. Disgusting.
Anton Sugar
Member
I know you're speaking specifically to this situation, but you do realize it is completely possible and normal to achieve an erection and ejaculate, even if you don't want to have sex, right?
Rape is rape.
Escape Goat
Member
Computer, is this your thing now? Sex 'scandals'? I think we're all pretty much numb to them now.
I think Paradoxal_Utopia is concerned about calling someone "raped" if they haven't been penetrated. I wonder if he'd consider it more Rapeish if she had sodomized him with a rubber dildo, even if he said he'd be curious about trying it. What about sounding his dick-hole with a swizzle-stick? Is it rape yet?
I don't propose anything, just saying it's hard to see the typical obsessed with sex high school junior male as a victim.. for getting sex. I remember juniors and seniors bragging about having sex with older women, and all of the males they were bragging to was envious of course.
Not in my experience as a high school kid.
But anyway, you're not making argument that age of consent shouldn't be lower for boys. Just that boys and girls are the same and should be treated the same. It seems like you're arguing for a lower age of consent for girls in addition to boys. Okay, if that's what you think - that all 15-17 girls really do think nonstop about wanting sex the ways boys do and see getting an older woman as a badge of honor the way boys do - then maybe you should make that argument. Make it if you want, but you are not even close to making an argument that the AoC shouldn't be lower for boys here.
The guys were asking for it!
Anton Sugar
Member
Only if they cry.
Slurpy2k20
Member
I had absolutely no idea, what a useful comment that was. I'm having trouble figuring what exactly it has to do with my post.
Also, it's telling I didn't get one serious reply to that post, apart for several swarmy, sarcastic one-liners that did not even attempt to address my point. Nice.
Stupid comment is stupid. My point was people like this obviously don't fear the ramifications of their actions. It's why a lot of people try to avoid driving 30 miles over the speed limit. It's because they're afraid of the ramifications. Currently, the worse that will happen to this rapist is that she'll lose her teaching license (lame), her job (lame), and maybe spend a couple of years in prison (or worse case scenario be put on "probation"). To her, it was worth it, but until there are harsher penalties in place, we're gonna keep getting stories like this every week.
First off, no matter the situation or the age of consent I don't think teachers and students should be having relationships. In the case of high school and younger this should definitely be out of the question, no matter what.
Outside of that, if we're just talking age of consent stuff, I don't think we should have different laws. I'm really only in favor of more nuance in the laws and the way we discuss them. Maybe the older person, irregardless of gender, if there's no real manipulation involved should be on the hook for pretty much 100% of the cost of the child? But then you run into the same nuance problem where if someone's 18 and another person's 16, then the 18 year old is, again, fucked....
Really, I'm just not sure how we could solve something like that, or even if we could. I don't think differing laws would be the correct answer at all, though.
I was just wondering if our thoughts on childbearing and who the "primary" parent tends to be in society had any affect on our double standard. I think it partially does. Maybe it's a small part. I don't know, but I think that has something to do with it.
Rocket Scientist
Member
I see this is your first teacher-student-sex-thread.
Seriously people, are we going to do this shit every week? Do people not get tired of throwing out the same arguments and complaints about these situations? I'm really surprised Evilore hasn't banned these types of threads. I mean, they are entertaining, and for some reason ''nice'' continues to be hilarious and seeing people complain about double standards is fun... Never mind, cheers to more of these threads!
Foxy Fox 39
Banned
I find it funny reading your responses not because I disagree but because logic is not going to win an argument here. These guys aren't really thinking about what they're saying...they're just arguing with passion fueled rhetoric.
What about a q-tip in the ear? Is that penetrative enough for you to consider him violated? In future, to avoid this mess, we'd appreciate an itemized list of all the things that you consider rape and all the things that you consider "rape".
Not in my experience as a high school kid.
But anyway, you're not making argument that age of consent shouldn't be lower for boys. Just that boys and girls are the same and should be treated the same. It seems like you're arguing for a lower age of consent for girls in addition to boys. Okay, if that's what you think - that all 15-17 girls really do think nonstop about wanting sex the ways boys do and see getting an older woman as a badge of honor the way boys do - then maybe you should make that argument. Make it if you want, but you are not even close to making an argument that the AoC shouldn't be lower for boys here.
I'm not advocating for the age of consent to be lowered for anybody.
Not lowered in which state? One problem is we've got wildly differing laws throughout the entire country. It's about 50 different laws that run the gamut in difference. In Wisconsin things definitely need to be changed or possibly lowered. Here it's 18 with no close in age exception at all.
According to him I think that situation would still be "rape" but maybe this time without the air quotes when speaking about it. Maybe with a wink.
I'll have to get the specific grades from him and set up a chart so we all know the difference between Rape, rape, 'rape', "rape", and "rape" *wink wink*.
Palette Swap
Member
Hey, I saw a special about one of these recently.
They argued this behavior could kill because there was one case where the teacher's husband killed the teenager. Yeah, that video was that good.
They argued this behavior could kill because there was one case where the teacher's husband killed the teenager. Yeah, that video was that good.
krameriffic
Member
It does pop up just about every week, and its always the same discussion. We have a few people post the South Park cops saying "nice", a few people saying "shit, she should fuck me instead, it would even be legal" and then the morality police reminding us that if the roles were reversed, we'd all be deploring the male teacher.
Anton Sugar
Member
Physically, I can agree with what you're saying to an extent. Yes, having someone forcibly rape you is physically different than having "consensual" sex with a minor. Rape isn't defined as just a physical act, however, and its consequences are not just "my body was raped". There can be/are severe developmental, social, emotional, and psychological consequences of being raped, and statutory rape is not an exception. The law is designed to protect society, and not just from physical violations.
Escape Goat
Member
i just lived the thread in 10 seconds.
Then you should stick to arguing why you feel that a 15 year boy who desires sex above all else is a victim for getting sex. Not that girls have the same wants. That just makes it look like you're agreeing with them but think it's sexist to see girls as not victims as well.
???
I've not been advocating any change in law. I have no idea why he was directing the statement to me.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked