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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

You answered your own question- She went along with it. Should the guy have dropped it after she said No? Sure. But being given knowledge that he was going to end the relationship without sex did not take away her agency. She still had the right and ability to say No. There is no indication of alcohol, drugs, threats of violence or other harm. There’s no indication she asked for, pushed, or demanded to leave or the intercourse to end.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

You answered your own question- She went along with it. Should the guy have dropped it after she said No? Sure. But being given knowledge that he was going to end the relationship without sex did not take away her agency. She still had the right and ability to say No. There is no indication of alcohol, drugs, threats of violence or other harm. There’s no indication she asked for, pushed, or demanded to leave or the intercourse to end.

That is why 14 is not the age of consent . She said no but was not taken seriously. She knew it was not right for her but he pressed on. Even if she consented, which I would argue she did not, she is below the age of consent.

Thank god there are laws to protect our girls from predators but nothing replaces parental oversight. Not all children are lucky enough to have vigilant parents and they still deserve to be protected from predators.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

She was free to go. She wanted to not break up so she consented to sex. She regretted it.

[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.

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.

Not sure if you noticed but,you just said he was a senior and he got her niece because he was popular which goes against your initial statement of the previous person making things up. just saying

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

You answered your own question- She went along with it. Should the guy have dropped it after she said No? Sure. But being given knowledge that he was going to end the relationship without sex did not take away her agency. She still had the right and ability to say No. There is no indication of alcohol, drugs, threats of violence or other harm. There’s no indication she asked for, pushed, or demanded to leave or the intercourse to end.

That is why 14 is not the age of consent . She said no but was not taken seriously. She knew it was not right for her but he pressed on. Even if she consented, which I would argue she did not, she is below the age of consent.

Thank god there are laws to protect our girls from predators but nothing replaces parental oversight. Not all children are lucky enough to have vigilant parents and they still deserve to be protected from predators.

Look you do not know what happen. She could have been the one to pushing for sex as a way to keep him as a boyfriend, they both could have agreed or he could have pressured her. Shocker 14 year olds makes a bad decisions! Now when her parents see cutting, substance-abuse and depression they start to ask hard questions. She being 14 could have lied as to what lead to them having sex. He just broke up with her why not put the blame on him ..I would have! Look at how quickly you are willing to say any 17 year old boy is a predator. Much easier for the parents to believe that vs the girl willing had sex while skipping school. This is why kids should not have sex and do drugs/alcohol.

Do see all boys and men as predators?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

She was free to go. She wanted to not break up so she consented to sex. She regretted it.

Of course she regretted it. She never wanted to in the first place.

She is 14. A child, not possible for legal consent.

You sound like Betsy De Vos’ policy advisor for handling student sexual Assaults.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

She was free to go. She wanted to not break up so she consented to sex. She regretted it.

Of course she regretted it. She never wanted to in the first place.

She is 14. A child, not possible for legal consent.

You sound like Betsy De Vos’ policy advisor for handling student sexual Assaults.

She wanted a boyfriend more than she didn't want sex.

She may be young but she's not an infant. She made a decision. Not a great one, but don't deny her agency.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

She was free to go. She wanted to not break up so she consented to sex. She regretted it.

Of course she regretted it. She never wanted to in the first place.

She is 14. A child, not possible for legal consent.

You sound like Betsy De Vos’ policy advisor for handling student sexual Assaults.

She wanted a boyfriend more than she didn't want sex.

She may be young but she's not an infant. She made a decision. Not a great one, but don't deny her agency.

Thank avid everyone single state legislature in the USA disagrees with you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not all asshole behavior is a crime.

This boyfriend sounds like a tool but come on, saying “I’ll break up with you if you don’t have sex with me” is not rape. If she had been a little older and wiser she probably would have seen this for the red flag that it is. He was selfish. He sounds like a crappy boyfriend and not a great person. That doesn’t make him a rapist though.

I hope your niece gets help and I hope she stays away from the jerk guys in the future.

saying he'll break up with her can be considered a threat

That doesn’t make it a crime if a reasonable person would not give in to the threat. Threatening to break up with her is not the same as threatening to kill or maim her. You know that, right?

This is an unfortunate situation but the girl has a role here. She ultimately agreed to have sex whether she really wanted to or not. That agreement = consent. She needs help figuring out why she kept putting herself in this situation of repeatedly going to his house for lunch when she knew what was happening and to agreeing to have sex when she really didn’t want to. Not saying the boy’s behavior is okay here either, but it’s not criminal.

It actually is criminal and she is suffering. She was 14 and below the age of legal consent in every single US state. He was 4 grades higher at school and close to legal adulthood.

He was in college? That’s 4 grades higher. It won’t be prosecuted.

It won’t be prosecuted if the family chooses not to press charges but if they do then they have a strong case.

She was below the age of consent in every single US state. He was at age of consent in most US states.

Demonstrable harm to victim since repeated rapes, and they can be legally
Treated as rapes since she was below age of consent.

It comes down to what is in the best interests of the victim. If she and her family want to fight, they have a strong case.

Spoken like someone who has never been the victim of a crime. Prosecuting attorneys never give a damn about "the best interests of the victim." Take a look at the news at the MANY crimes (of all nature) that occur and the perp is allowed to walk free.
No prosecuting attorney is going to prosecute a teenager because his ex girfriend is sad that he broke up with her. If anything, her parents might be brought up on charges of child neglect because her parents aren't helping her enough with the self harm she is inflicting.

I actually have been a victim and a victim while a minor at that. So many women have had such experiences. I am working hard to make sure my DD does not have this experience and I raised our son to respect women.

I think you are wrong in your assessment. The young man is not covered by Romeo and Juliette laws in many states.

He was close to adulthood and driving a 14 year old freshman off school campus regularly without parental knowledge or permission. He placed pressure on her to engage in sex after she repeatedly said no. He was a popular good student so she caved to his pressure.

I would seriously consider adding kidnapping to the charges. Many Authorities will take a senior driving a minor student off campus without parental knowledge or permission in order to have carnal knowledge with her seriously.

This young man represents a mundane face of evil.

Some of us heal better if we fight. Some better by quietly licking their wounds.

Right now this poor girl who was well below the legal age of conserving is self harming and abusing substances. She may find he

Sounds like you need help even more than OP's niece.

+1

Kidnapping charges? Popular good student? I can’t even!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

She was free to go. She wanted to not break up so she consented to sex. She regretted it.

Of course she regretted it. She never wanted to in the first place.

She is 14. A child, not possible for legal consent.

You sound like Betsy De Vos’ policy advisor for handling student sexual Assaults.

She wanted a boyfriend more than she didn't want sex.

She may be young but she's not an infant. She made a decision. Not a great one, but don't deny her agency.

Every single state legislature disagrees with you.

She and Her family can enormous agency by pressing charges against his criminal conduct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

She was free to go. She wanted to not break up so she consented to sex. She regretted it.

Of course she regretted it. She never wanted to in the first place.

She is 14. A child, not possible for legal consent.

You sound like Betsy De Vos’ policy advisor for handling student sexual Assaults.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

She was free to go. She wanted to not break up so she consented to sex. She regretted it.

Of course she regretted it. She never wanted to in the first place.

She is 14. A child, not possible for legal consent.

You sound like Betsy De Vos’ policy advisor for handling student sexual Assaults.

She wanted a boyfriend more than she didn't want sex.

She may be young but she's not an infant. She made a decision. Not a great one, but don't deny her agency.

Every single state legislature disagrees with you.

She and Her family can enormous agency by pressing charges against his criminal conduct.

I'm sure that having her parents charge her ex-boyfriend will make her feel so much better!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

She was free to go. She wanted to not break up so she consented to sex. She regretted it.

Of course she regretted it. She never wanted to in the first place.

She is 14. A child, not possible for legal consent.

You sound like Betsy De Vos’ policy advisor for handling student sexual Assaults.

She wanted a boyfriend more than she didn't want sex.

She may be young but she's not an infant. She made a decision. Not a great one, but don't deny her agency.

Every single state legislature disagrees with you.

She and Her family can enormous agency by pressing charges against his criminal conduct.

I'm sure that having her parents charge her ex-boyfriend will make her feel so much better!!!

It might or it might not. But it is their legal right to do so if they wish to.

[Anonymous]

https://www.usnews.com/news/education-news/articles/2021-06-07/education-department-begins-sweeping-rewrite-of-title-ix-sexual-misconduct-rules
Education Department Begins Sweeping Rewrite of Title IX Sexual Misconduct Rules
June 7, 2021

The federal regulations protecting students against sex discrimination in learning environments stand to be expanded in scope under the Biden administration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not all asshole behavior is a crime.

This boyfriend sounds like a tool but come on, saying “I’ll break up with you if you don’t have sex with me” is not rape. If she had been a little older and wiser she probably would have seen this for the red flag that it is. He was selfish. He sounds like a crappy boyfriend and not a great person. That doesn’t make him a rapist though.

I hope your niece gets help and I hope she stays away from the jerk guys in the future.

saying he'll break up with her can be considered a threat

That doesn’t make it a crime if a reasonable person would not give in to the threat. Threatening to break up with her is not the same as threatening to kill or maim her. You know that, right?

This is an unfortunate situation but the girl has a role here. She ultimately agreed to have sex whether she really wanted to or not. That agreement = consent. She needs help figuring out why she kept putting herself in this situation of repeatedly going to his house for lunch when she knew what was happening and to agreeing to have sex when she really didn’t want to. Not saying the boy’s behavior is okay here either, but it’s not criminal.

It actually is criminal and she is suffering. She was 14 and below the age of legal consent in every single US state. He was 4 grades higher at school and close to legal adulthood.

He was in college? That’s 4 grades higher. It won’t be prosecuted.

It won’t be prosecuted if the family chooses not to press charges but if they do then they have a strong case.

She was below the age of consent in every single US state. He was at age of consent in most US states.

Demonstrable harm to victim since repeated rapes, and they can be legally
Treated as rapes since she was below age of consent.

It comes down to what is in the best interests of the victim. If she and her family want to fight, they have a strong case.

Spoken like someone who has never been the victim of a crime. Prosecuting attorneys never give a damn about "the best interests of the victim." Take a look at the news at the MANY crimes (of all nature) that occur and the perp is allowed to walk free.
No prosecuting attorney is going to prosecute a teenager because his ex girfriend is sad that he broke up with her. If anything, her parents might be brought up on charges of child neglect because her parents aren't helping her enough with the self harm she is inflicting.

I actually have been a victim and a victim while a minor at that. So many women have had such experiences. I am working hard to make sure my DD does not have this experience and I raised our son to respect women.

I think you are wrong in your assessment. The young man is not covered by Romeo and Juliette laws in many states.

He was close to adulthood and driving a 14 year old freshman off school campus regularly without parental knowledge or permission. He placed pressure on her to engage in sex after she repeatedly said no. He was a popular good student so she caved to his pressure.

I would seriously consider adding kidnapping to the charges. Many Authorities will take a senior driving a minor student off campus without parental knowledge or permission in order to have carnal knowledge with her seriously.

This young man represents a mundane face of evil.

Some of us heal better if we fight. Some better by quietly licking their wounds.

Right now this poor girl who was well below the legal age of conserving is self harming and abusing substances. She may find he

Sounds like you need help even more than OP's niece.

+1

Kidnapping charges? Popular good student? I can’t even!

No way in hell it’s kidnapping nor rape. You can’t make up laws as you go on. In order to commit kidnapping the “victim” has to be taken without her consent by someone whose intent is criminal. The girl wanted to get laid as much as the boy. Drop it.