Culture

[Whiskeyjack]

...but you still would tho.

At 16 or 17? Yes, I probably would have. Which is all the more reason to throw the book at her.

 

[greyhammer90]

Question for the lawyers.

Say the boys turn 18 soon. Can they hypothetically get the charges dropped since they were the "victims"?

Not a criminal attorney by any means but I would guess no. The state has such an interest in preventing pedo behavior that there's no way they would let a known child molester walk just because a young victim claims they don't want it to occur. If you think about it, that would be a really bad loophole because then every emotionally manipulated almost-18 year old would be on the market for those people.

 

[greyhammer90]

At 16 or 17? Yes, I probably would have. Which is all the more reason to throw the book at her.

Teenage boys are really where the whole "you can't consent if your this age" mindset makes the most sense IMO. A teenage boy is completely incapable of understanding what he's getting himself into and has way, way, way more hormones than good-sense.

It's like giving a dying man in the middle of a dessert a gallon of salt water. He's eventually going to drink it no matter how bad it is for him.

 

[wizards8507]

Not a criminal attorney by any means but I would guess no. The state has such an interest in preventing pedo behavior that there's no way they would let a known child molester walk just because a young victim claims they don't want it to occur. If you think about it, that would be a really bad loophole because then every emotionally manipulated almost-18 year old would be on the market for those people.

It's not "pedo behavior." The age of consent is a social construct, no italics.

 

[greyhammer90]

It's not "pedo behavior." The age of consent is a social construct, no italics.

I'm speaking legally because his question was a legal question. Her behavior would cause her to be legally labeled a pedophile. The state has a strong interest in preventing that behavior.

 

[wizards8507]

I'm speaking legally because his question was a legal question. Her behavior would cause her to be legally labeled a pedophile. The state has a strong interest in preventing that behavior.

No it wouldn't. Pedophilia isn't a legal term. Pedophilia isn't even a crime. It's not a crime to be sexually attracted to a six year old. Statutory rape and pedophilia are not the same thing.

 

[connor_in]

It's not "pedo behavior." The age of consent is a social construct, no italics.

Legal construct?


EDIT already discussed by the time i posted...meant for actual act

 

[Whiskeyjack]

It's not "pedo behavior." The age of consent is a social construct, no italics.

Wiz, rethink this. "But what if the child consents..." is the most ridiculous, repulsive and obviously evil corner of libertarian thought.

 

[Domina Nostra]

The "First Lady" of France did the exact same thing with the French Obama, only with 9 more years of experience under her belt. Nobody seems to care about that. So its understandable that its hard for some people to see it as a criminal act.

 

[wizards8507]

Wiz, rethink this. "But what if the child consents..." is the most ridiculous corner of libertarian thought.

That's not my point. I'm not saying what this woman did was okay or should be legal. I'm simply objecting to the term "pedophilia," which refers specifically to sexual maturity, i.e. it's not pedophilia if the child is post-pubescent. The legal age of consent and psychological age of majority are two separate conversations.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

That's not my point. I'm not saying what this woman did was okay or should be legal. I'm simply objecting to the term "pedophilia," which refers specifically to sexual maturity, i.e. it's not pedophilia if the child is post-pubescent. The legal age of consent and psychological age of majority are two separate conversations.

You pick the weirdest fucking hills to die on.

 

[greyhammer90]

No it wouldn't. Pedophilia isn't a legal term. Pedophilia isn't even a crime. It's not a crime to be sexually attracted to a six year old. Statutory rape and pedophilia are not the same thing.

Holy cow do you know how to make an argument about nothing. I am aware that pedophilia is a condition. I am aware that pedophilia is technically an attraction to prepubescent children. However, in the United States it is commonly accepted both in the legal field and in general parlance to call someone who commits molestation to people under the age of consent a pedophile. I am also aware that certain state departments label people pedophiles in their state records over statutory rape, because I have seen these.

I would think that the board would allow me a modicum of informality, particularly when the definition of pedophilia has absolutely no bearing on the overall point of my post. But Lo! There Wiz appears over the horizon on a white horse. He races down the sloping range towards the peasants and their 'common usage'. With his lightsaber he charges the ramparts and lets out his battle cry!

 

[koonja]

No it wouldn't. Pedophilia isn't a legal term. Pedophilia isn't even a crime. It's not a crime to be sexually attracted to a six year old. Statutory rape and pedophilia are not the same thing.

That's not my point. I'm not saying what this woman did was okay or should be legal. I'm simply objecting to the term "pedophilia," which refers specifically to sexual maturity, i.e. it's not pedophilia if the child is post-pubescent. The legal age of consent and psychological age of majority are two separate conversations.

Child please. This is a 2007 Koon type argument.

 

[Domina Nostra]

That's not my point. I'm not saying what this woman did was okay or should be legal. I'm simply objecting to the term "pedophilia," which refers specifically to sexual maturity, i.e. it's not pedophilia if the child is post-pubescent. The legal age of consent and psychological age of agency are two separate conversations.

As far as consent, arbitrary lines have to be chosen. And this is just a good example of one of those lines. But as men who have been 17 yo, it doesn't strike us as entirely obvious that what happened there was a person incapable of giving consent being criminally taken advantage of by an adult. In fact, the kid may have experienced the situation in the exact opposite manner.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Child please. This is a 2007 Koon type argument.

When Koon is telling you to sit this one out, you know it's time to reconsider your life choices.

 

[Cackalacky]

I will give anyone all my vbucks if they can photoshop wiz onto Milo's body.

 

[ACamp1900]

I just figured out the age difference between wiz and his wife........

 

[wizards8507]

I will give anyone all my vbucks if they can photoshop wiz onto Milo's body.

I wish I had Milo's body...

Take that however you want.

I just figured out the age difference between wiz and his wife........

Joke's on you. My wife is older than me.

If you want to see some disturbing math, calculate how old I was when your mom picked me up for the first time.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I wish I had Milo's body...

... in your basement freezer?

 

[ACamp1900]

If you want to see some disturbing math, calculate how old I was when your mom picked me up for the first time.

But my mom was never a teacher... how can she be with a third grade education??

 

[Domina Nostra]

Child please. This is a 2007 Koon type argument.

When Koon is telling you to sit this one out, you know it's time to reconsider your life choices.

I will give anyone all my vbucks if they can photoshop wiz onto Milo's body.

I'm missing some of the jokes here, but I think it's both healthy and necessary to distinguish between pedophilia and taking advantage of an older minor.

The latter is bad and should be punished, but the former is abominable and requires the harshest penalties the law can tolerate.

Calling sex between a 25 year old woman and a 17 year old male "pedophilia" waters down the term--just like calling a man who has consensual sex with a friend after she's had a few drinks "rape" waters down that term.

All of those behaviors may be wrong, but failing to distinguish them robs the terms "pedophilia" and "rape" of the power they should have to shock.

 

[Cackalacky]

I'm missing some of the jokes here, but I think it's both healthy and necessary to distinguish between pedophilia and taking advantage of an older minor.

The latter is bad and should be punished, but the former is abominable and requires the harshest penalties the law can tolerate.

Calling sex between a 25 year old woman and a 17 year old male "pedophilia" waters down the term--just like calling a man who has consensual sex with his girlfriend after she's had a few drinks "rape" waters down that term.

All of those behaviors may be wrong, but failing to distinguish them robs the terms "pedophilia" and "rape" of the power they should have to shock.

This is the type of argument Wooderson would have made had he gone to college.

 

[wizards8507]

 

[Domina Nostra]

This is the type of argument Wooderson would have made had he gone to college.

So you don't see an important distinction between what this high school teacher did and her doing the same thing with a 10 year old. Or, say, a fourth grade teacher doing the same thing with a 9 year old girl? Please!


Just because something is bad, doesn't mean you get to call it whatever you want. Words have meanings.

 

[Cackalacky]

LMAO...Done. I saved the picture though so now it is forever.

 

[RDU Irish]

So you don't see an important distinction between what this high school teacher did and her doing the same thing with a 10 year old. Or, say, a fourth grade teacher doing the same thing with a 9 year old girl? Please!


Just because something is bad, doesn't mean you get to call it whatever you want. Words have meanings.

Kind of like drunk driving with a .02 BAC vs .20 BAC - night and day difference on the real threat to society. Just as easy to imagine HS juniors and seniors doing nothing but look to score with the (likely) messed up 25 year old hot teacher. I do think who-stalked-who is relevant and have a hard time thinking the (likely) high fiving teenagers should be held harmless here.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I'm missing some of the jokes here, but I think it's both healthy and necessary to distinguish between pedophilia and taking advantage of an older minor.

The latter is bad and should be punished, but the former is abominable and requires the harshest penalties the law can tolerate.

Calling sex between a 25 year old woman and a 17 year old male "pedophilia" waters down the term--just like calling a man who has consensual sex with a friend after she's had a few drinks "rape" waters down that term.

All of those behaviors may be wrong, but failing to distinguish them robs the terms "pedophilia" and "rape" of the power they should have to shock.

It was clear from the context that by "preventing pedo behavior", grey meant "policing the statutory age of consent". We're busting wiz's chops for pedantry. No one here would deny the distinction you're trying to make.

 

[Cackalacky]

So you don't see an important distinction between what this high school teacher did and her doing the same thing with a 10 year old. Or, say, a fourth grade teacher doing the same thing with a 9 year old girl? Please!


Just because something is bad, doesn't mean you get to call it whatever you want. Words have meanings.

I was being tongue in cheek.

 

[BGIF]

Question for the lawyers.

Say the boys turn 18 soon. Can they hypothetically get the charges dropped since they were the "victims"?

Not a lawyer.

18 has nothing to do with this case. Age of consent for males in NC is 16.

NC has a law prohibiting teachers from having sex with students.

 

[Domina Nostra]

It was clear from the context that by "preventing pedo behavior", grey meant "policing the statutory age of consent". We're busting wiz's chops for pedantry. No one here would deny the distinction you're trying to make.

I was being tongue in cheek.

You both need to be more accommodating of men, like me, who were born without a sense of humor. It's an underappreciated disability.