Is this “boys will be boys” or an offense?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a lot of assumptions being made on this thread. Laws regarding statutory rape vary from state to state. 14 is generally below the age of consent, regardless of the age of the other party. There are Romeo and Juliet laws in some states, but not in others. If the boy turned 18 during the relationship, that's another level all together.

Well that is a pretty stupid law. A 14 year old having sex with 17 year old is okay. They continue to have sex but one turns 18 and now is arrested and charged with rape? It’s either rape at the beginning or it is not.

Statutory rape laws are not about protecting the girl, herself. They're about protecting the parents' child and attacking the boyfriend.

This thread is strange, the way everyone is using statutory rape laws for a different purpose.

If statutory rape laws were about protecting minors, she could be charged too, in the states where the age of consent is 18.

Yep if it’s VA they are both guilty of rape

No Ava RJ laws cover 15-27 year olds not 14 years olds. He would be guilty of rape not her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a lot of assumptions being made on this thread. Laws regarding statutory rape vary from state to state. 14 is generally below the age of consent, regardless of the age of the other party. There are Romeo and Juliet laws in some states, but not in others. If the boy turned 18 during the relationship, that's another level all together.

Well that is a pretty stupid law. A 14 year old having sex with 17 year old is okay. They continue to have sex but one turns 18 and now is arrested and charged with rape? It’s either rape at the beginning or it is not.

Statutory rape laws are not about protecting the girl, herself. They're about protecting the parents' child and attacking the boyfriend.

This thread is strange, the way everyone is using statutory rape laws for a different purpose.

If statutory rape laws were about protecting minors, she could be charged too, in the states where the age of consent is 18.

Yep if it’s VA they are both guilty of rape

No Ava RJ laws cover 15-27 year olds not 14 years olds. He would be guilty of rape not her.

Sorry 15-17 year olds

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is old enough to consent to somebody < 4 years older than she is so it is not a sexual assault.

Good lord she absolutely is not. She is no where near age of legal consent in any state …

You don't understand the law.

the law is 16 to have sex with anybody you want.

If you are 14-15 you can have sex with anybody <4 year older than you are.

And actually I think it's insane that a 16 or even an 18 year old can consent to sex with a 50 year old or even a 28 year old, that is way more disturbing than 14 and 17.

18 is a legal adult. I think it's insane that you want the government to tell an adult woman what she can/can't do with her body.

That does not mean they can always consent.

Yes they can.

You clearly don't understand consent.

I clearly do. You clearly do not. An 18 year old can consent to sex with whomever he/she wants.

Are you talking about if they are incapacitated?

What about if there is an imbalance of power?
What if grooming started at 14 and sex started at 18?
What if they are a step parent, like Woody Allen?
What if they are trapped in an abusive marriage and feel they can't leave?
What if they are a prostitute and will be killed if they try to leave, thrown in a river and nobody cares.

The last two you mention are under threat of violence. That is not "consent." Again, YOU are the one who clearly doesn't understand consent.
Yes, you can consent to sex with a step parent, if you like.
Consensual sex at 18, regardless of how long you've known the person, is legal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a lot of assumptions being made on this thread. Laws regarding statutory rape vary from state to state. 14 is generally below the age of consent, regardless of the age of the other party. There are Romeo and Juliet laws in some states, but not in others. If the boy turned 18 during the relationship, that's another level all together.

Well that is a pretty stupid law. A 14 year old having sex with 17 year old is okay. They continue to have sex but one turns 18 and now is arrested and charged with rape? It’s either rape at the beginning or it is not.

Statutory rape laws are not about protecting the girl, herself. They're about protecting the parents' child and attacking the boyfriend.

This thread is strange, the way everyone is using statutory rape laws for a different purpose.

If statutory rape laws were about protecting minors, she could be charged too, in the states where the age of consent is 18.

Absolutely wrong: they are about protecting minors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a lot of assumptions being made on this thread. Laws regarding statutory rape vary from state to state. 14 is generally below the age of consent, regardless of the age of the other party. There are Romeo and Juliet laws in some states, but not in others. If the boy turned 18 during the relationship, that's another level all together.

Well that is a pretty stupid law. A 14 year old having sex with 17 year old is okay. They continue to have sex but one turns 18 and now is arrested and charged with rape? It’s either rape at the beginning or it is not.

Statutory rape laws are not about protecting the girl, herself. They're about protecting the parents' child and attacking the boyfriend.

This thread is strange, the way everyone is using statutory rape laws for a different purpose.

If statutory rape laws were about protecting minors, she could be charged too, in the states where the age of consent is 18.

Yep if it’s VA they are both guilty of rape

No Ava RJ laws cover 15-27 year olds not 14 years olds. He would be guilty of rape not her.

Sorry 15-17 year olds

Exactly it does not cover 14 so she is not covered under the RJ law. Legally she can’t have sex with a 17 year old. That sadly is how the law was written.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is old enough to consent to somebody < 4 years older than she is so it is not a sexual assault.

Good lord she absolutely is not. She is no where near age of legal consent in any state …

You don't understand the law.

the law is 16 to have sex with anybody you want.

If you are 14-15 you can have sex with anybody <4 year older than you are.

And actually I think it's insane that a 16 or even an 18 year old can consent to sex with a 50 year old or even a 28 year old, that is way more disturbing than 14 and 17.

18 is a legal adult. I think it's insane that you want the government to tell an adult woman what she can/can't do with her body.

That does not mean they can always consent.

Yes they can.

You clearly don't understand consent.

I clearly do. You clearly do not. An 18 year old can consent to sex with whomever he/she wants.

Are you talking about if they are incapacitated?

What about if there is an imbalance of power?
What if grooming started at 14 and sex started at 18?
What if they are a step parent, like Woody Allen?
What if they are trapped in an abusive marriage and feel they can't leave?
What if they are a prostitute and will be killed if they try to leave, thrown in a river and nobody cares.

The last two you mention are under threat of violence. That is not "consent." Again, YOU are the one who clearly doesn't understand consent.
Yes, you can consent to sex with a step parent, if you like.
Consensual sex at 18, regardless of how long you've known the person, is legal.

It’s only “under the threat of violence “ if you can prove it. Again, YOU are the one who clearly does not understand consent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a lot of assumptions being made on this thread. Laws regarding statutory rape vary from state to state. 14 is generally below the age of consent, regardless of the age of the other party. There are Romeo and Juliet laws in some states, but not in others. If the boy turned 18 during the relationship, that's another level all together.

Well that is a pretty stupid law. A 14 year old having sex with 17 year old is okay. They continue to have sex but one turns 18 and now is arrested and charged with rape? It’s either rape at the beginning or it is not.

Statutory rape laws are not about protecting the girl, herself. They're about protecting the parents' child and attacking the boyfriend.

This thread is strange, the way everyone is using statutory rape laws for a different purpose.

If statutory rape laws were about protecting minors, she could be charged too, in the states where the age of consent is 18.

Absolutely wrong: they are about protecting minors.

What is strange is posters victim blaming children. The young man was close to legal adult age and past the age of consent in almost all states while the victim was not of legal age in any state. He exploited his status as a popular senior with a car to force her into sexual relations she was not ready for. She is suffering a great deal.

Obviously she made bad choices, and the parents should have been more involved. But really not many parents would think they need to check to make sure that much older teens are not driving their daughters off campus every day to coerce them into an illegal sexual
relationship. 14 is too young to resist the pressure.

I am sure that many of us with younger teens will add this to our list of HS restrictions from
Now on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a lot of assumptions being made on this thread. Laws regarding statutory rape vary from state to state. 14 is generally below the age of consent, regardless of the age of the other party. There are Romeo and Juliet laws in some states, but not in others. If the boy turned 18 during the relationship, that's another level all together.

Well that is a pretty stupid law. A 14 year old having sex with 17 year old is okay. They continue to have sex but one turns 18 and now is arrested and charged with rape? It’s either rape at the beginning or it is not.

Statutory rape laws are not about protecting the girl, herself. They're about protecting the parents' child and attacking the boyfriend.

This thread is strange, the way everyone is using statutory rape laws for a different purpose.

If statutory rape laws were about protecting minors, she could be charged too, in the states where the age of consent is 18.

Absolutely wrong: they are about protecting minors.

What is strange is posters victim blaming children. The young man was close to legal adult age and past the age of consent in almost all states while the victim was not of legal age in any state. He exploited his status as a popular senior with a car to force her into sexual relations she was not ready for. She is suffering a great deal.

Obviously she made bad choices, and the parents should have been more involved. But really not many parents would think they need to check to make sure that much older teens are not driving their daughters off campus every day to coerce them into an illegal sexual
relationship. 14 is too young to resist the pressure.

I am sure that many of us with younger teens will add this to our list of HS restrictions from
Now on.

My mom absolutely did do this in 1991. I was not allowed to accept rides from seniors and she was VERY clear about it, and why that was a rule. I was allowed to accept a ride from a friend I had known since elementary school starting in 10th grade when he got a license and a car.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a lot of assumptions being made on this thread. Laws regarding statutory rape vary from state to state. 14 is generally below the age of consent, regardless of the age of the other party. There are Romeo and Juliet laws in some states, but not in others. If the boy turned 18 during the relationship, that's another level all together.

Well that is a pretty stupid law. A 14 year old having sex with 17 year old is okay. They continue to have sex but one turns 18 and now is arrested and charged with rape? It’s either rape at the beginning or it is not.

Statutory rape laws are not about protecting the girl, herself. They're about protecting the parents' child and attacking the boyfriend.

This thread is strange, the way everyone is using statutory rape laws for a different purpose.

If statutory rape laws were about protecting minors, she could be charged too, in the states where the age of consent is 18.

Absolutely wrong: they are about protecting minors.

What is strange is posters victim blaming children. The young man was close to legal adult age and past the age of consent in almost all states while the victim was not of legal age in any state. He exploited his status as a popular senior with a car to force her into sexual relations she was not ready for. She is suffering a great deal.

Obviously she made bad choices, and the parents should have been more involved. But really not many parents would think they need to check to make sure that much older teens are not driving their daughters off campus every day to coerce them into an illegal sexual
relationship. 14 is too young to resist the pressure.

I am sure that many of us with younger teens will add this to our list of HS restrictions from
Now on.

My mom absolutely did do this in 1991. I was not allowed to accept rides from seniors and she was VERY clear about it, and why that was a rule. I was allowed to accept a ride from a friend I had known since elementary school starting in 10th grade when he got a license and a car.

Adding to my list too when kid enters HS. My oldest is a boy and it never occurred to me they shouldn’t accept rides from seniors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a lot of assumptions being made on this thread. Laws regarding statutory rape vary from state to state. 14 is generally below the age of consent, regardless of the age of the other party. There are Romeo and Juliet laws in some states, but not in others. If the boy turned 18 during the relationship, that's another level all together.

Well that is a pretty stupid law. A 14 year old having sex with 17 year old is okay. They continue to have sex but one turns 18 and now is arrested and charged with rape? It’s either rape at the beginning or it is not.

Statutory rape laws are not about protecting the girl, herself. They're about protecting the parents' child and attacking the boyfriend.

This thread is strange, the way everyone is using statutory rape laws for a different purpose.

If statutory rape laws were about protecting minors, she could be charged too, in the states where the age of consent is 18.

Absolutely wrong: they are about protecting minors.

What is strange is posters victim blaming children. The young man was close to legal adult age and past the age of consent in almost all states while the victim was not of legal age in any state. He exploited his status as a popular senior with a car to force her into sexual relations she was not ready for. She is suffering a great deal.

Obviously she made bad choices, and the parents should have been more involved. But really not many parents would think they need to check to make sure that much older teens are not driving their daughters off campus every day to coerce them into an illegal sexual
relationship. 14 is too young to resist the pressure.

I am sure that many of us with younger teens will add this to our list of HS restrictions from
Now on.

Really? You know for a fact he was a popular senior who forced himself on this girl? Guess he was a real life Jake Ryan? Wow you are really making things up. No where did it say he forced himself on her. Here is how it works in high school :the popular seniors date their own grade or one below. Why? Because they are popular! These two individuals were definitely on the fringes of the social scene not the center.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is old enough to consent to somebody < 4 years older than she is so it is not a sexual assault.

Good lord she absolutely is not. She is no where near age of legal consent in any state …

Well technically in some states neither we’re old enough to consent. So maybe they are both guilty of statutory rape.

[Anonymous]

This is why you don't allow freshmen ("freshmeat") to hang out with juniors or seniors.

Have no idea whether what he did was technically illegal or not, you would have to consult a lawyer, but it was obviously planned and unethical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a lot of assumptions being made on this thread. Laws regarding statutory rape vary from state to state. 14 is generally below the age of consent, regardless of the age of the other party. There are Romeo and Juliet laws in some states, but not in others. If the boy turned 18 during the relationship, that's another level all together.

Well that is a pretty stupid law. A 14 year old having sex with 17 year old is okay. They continue to have sex but one turns 18 and now is arrested and charged with rape? It’s either rape at the beginning or it is not.

Statutory rape laws are not about protecting the girl, herself. They're about protecting the parents' child and attacking the boyfriend.

This thread is strange, the way everyone is using statutory rape laws for a different purpose.

If statutory rape laws were about protecting minors, she could be charged too, in the states where the age of consent is 18.

Absolutely wrong: they are about protecting minors.

What is strange is posters victim blaming children. The young man was close to legal adult age and past the age of consent in almost all states while the victim was not of legal age in any state. He exploited his status as a popular senior with a car to force her into sexual relations she was not ready for. She is suffering a great deal.

Obviously she made bad choices, and the parents should have been more involved. But really not many parents would think they need to check to make sure that much older teens are not driving their daughters off campus every day to coerce them into an illegal sexual
relationship. 14 is too young to resist the pressure.

I am sure that many of us with younger teens will add this to our list of HS restrictions from
Now on.

I have both sons and daughters. My youngest is a 14 year old girl with a boyfriend. I absolutely always know where she is and I absolutely check in to be sure they are where I think they are. I honestly don’t get how the parents don’t have at least some blame here.

And as much as 14 year old girls are not adults and not ready for adult decisions, neither are 17 year old boys. The level of vitriol that has been spouted about this boy is awful. He’s also a kid and she consented. Most of us are aware that kids are not waiting until marriage or even adulthood to have sex so we are pounding consent into our boys’ heads. Seems like he absorbed the lesson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a lot of assumptions being made on this thread. Laws regarding statutory rape vary from state to state. 14 is generally below the age of consent, regardless of the age of the other party. There are Romeo and Juliet laws in some states, but not in others. If the boy turned 18 during the relationship, that's another level all together.

Well that is a pretty stupid law. A 14 year old having sex with 17 year old is okay. They continue to have sex but one turns 18 and now is arrested and charged with rape? It’s either rape at the beginning or it is not.

Statutory rape laws are not about protecting the girl, herself. They're about protecting the parents' child and attacking the boyfriend.

This thread is strange, the way everyone is using statutory rape laws for a different purpose.

If statutory rape laws were about protecting minors, she could be charged too, in the states where the age of consent is 18.

Absolutely wrong: they are about protecting minors.

What is strange is posters victim blaming children. The young man was close to legal adult age and past the age of consent in almost all states while the victim was not of legal age in any state. He exploited his status as a popular senior with a car to force her into sexual relations she was not ready for. She is suffering a great deal.

Obviously she made bad choices, and the parents should have been more involved. But really not many parents would think they need to check to make sure that much older teens are not driving their daughters off campus every day to coerce them into an illegal sexual
relationship. 14 is too young to resist the pressure.

I am sure that many of us with younger teens will add this to our list of HS restrictions from
Now on.

I have both sons and daughters. My youngest is a 14 year old girl with a boyfriend. I absolutely always know where she is and I absolutely check in to be sure they are where I think they are. I honestly don’t get how the parents don’t have at least some blame here.

And as much as 14 year old girls are not adults and not ready for adult decisions, neither are 17 year old boys. The level of vitriol that has been spouted about this boy is awful. He’s also a kid and she consented. Most of us are aware that kids are not waiting until marriage or even adulthood to have sex so we are pounding consent into our boys’ heads. Seems like he absorbed the lesson.

How does this read as consent in any context?
“She did not want to have sex, told him she didn’t want it, but he pressured her and coerced her. Told her he would break up with her if she didn’t. She reluctantly went through with it but hated it.”

The 17 year old boy acted as a predator. I say this with no vitriol but as a fact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a lot of assumptions being made on this thread. Laws regarding statutory rape vary from state to state. 14 is generally below the age of consent, regardless of the age of the other party. There are Romeo and Juliet laws in some states, but not in others. If the boy turned 18 during the relationship, that's another level all together.

Well that is a pretty stupid law. A 14 year old having sex with 17 year old is okay. They continue to have sex but one turns 18 and now is arrested and charged with rape? It’s either rape at the beginning or it is not.

Statutory rape laws are not about protecting the girl, herself. They're about protecting the parents' child and attacking the boyfriend.

This thread is strange, the way everyone is using statutory rape laws for a different purpose.

If statutory rape laws were about protecting minors, she could be charged too, in the states where the age of consent is 18.

Absolutely wrong: they are about protecting minors.

What is strange is posters victim blaming children. The young man was close to legal adult age and past the age of consent in almost all states while the victim was not of legal age in any state. He exploited his status as a popular senior with a car to force her into sexual relations she was not ready for. She is suffering a great deal.

Obviously she made bad choices, and the parents should have been more involved. But really not many parents would think they need to check to make sure that much older teens are not driving their daughters off campus every day to coerce them into an illegal sexual
relationship. 14 is too young to resist the pressure.

I am sure that many of us with younger teens will add this to our list of HS restrictions from
Now on.

I have both sons and daughters. My youngest is a 14 year old girl with a boyfriend. I absolutely always know where she is and I absolutely check in to be sure they are where I think they are. I honestly don’t get how the parents don’t have at least some blame here.

And as much as 14 year old girls are not adults and not ready for adult decisions, neither are 17 year old boys. The level of vitriol that has been spouted about this boy is awful. He’s also a kid and she consented. Most of us are aware that kids are not waiting until marriage or even adulthood to have sex so we are pounding consent into our boys’ heads. Seems like he absorbed the lesson.

Oh yes let’s protect the 17 year old predator of minors so he can repeat this behavior in college where there are even fewer legal rights for female student victims.