Tidal wave of sexual assault-misconduct allegations list

[Guest]

NEVER MIND.

[_Chap]

As a parent, I would say:

1. Many teenage girls and boys are quite naïve sexually and hence are very vulnerable to exploitation by older people. I am happy, therefore, for there to be laws in place that seek to protect them by defining an age below which sexual intercourse with any person is criminal. If there was a more subtle but equally effective way of writing such a law, I'd like to hear about it. But so far I haven't.

2. In order to be in favour of having such a law, if is not necessary to hold the foolish position that all teenagers are traumatised by the experience of sex with an older person. I certainly don't hold that position.

So what? Most of us are in favour of speed limits on freeways being enforced, even if we realise that some high-speed driving (in good weather, in an appropriate vehicle, by a skilled driver, in low density traffic) carries a quite low risk of harm. But no legislation can be effective if it tries to allow for such delicate shadings. Same with the case of sex with a minor. If you want to protect the vulnerable, it simply has to be ruled out - you can't have law written on the basis that 'it's all right if the minor says he/she feels good about it'.

[Guest]

As a parent, I would say:

1. Many teenage girls and boys are quite naïve sexually and hence are very vulnerable to exploitation by older people. I am happy, therefore, for there to be laws in place that seek to protect them by defining an age below which sexual intercourse with any person is criminal. If there was a more subtle but equally effective way of writing such a law, I'd like to hear about it. But so far I haven't.

You make good points Chap. I do agree we need age of consent laws to protect the vulnerable. However, in California the age of consent is 18 years with no close in age exemption, so a 19 year old can be criminally charged for having sex with a 17 year old. In the same California a 40 year old man can legally marry a 12 year old girl because the state lacks a minimum age for marriage. California is full of s***.

So what? Most of us are in favour of speed limits on freeways being enforced, even if we realise that some high-speed driving (in good weather, in an appropriate vehicle, by a skilled driver, in low density traffic) carries a quite low risk of harm. But no legislation can be effective if it tries to allow for such delicate shadings. Same with the case of sex with a minor. If you want to protect the vulnerable, it simply has to be ruled out - you can't have law written on the basis that 'it's all right if the minor says he/she feels good about it'.

I agree, but

"In 2015, an Idaho judge sentenced 21-year-old John Polomo to 14 years for consensual sex with a friend who was 17"

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... enough-sex

In my opinion the legal minimum age should be 16 or 17 years. .

[_Xenophon]

Just for you, Jersey Girl:

"The Latest: Cosby being taken to suburban Philadelphia jail"

[_Jersey Girl]

Actor Kevin Spacey charged with sexual assault.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/27/movi ... tails.html

[_Jersey Girl]

There were recent allegations against another actor (?) that slipped through my screen and can't recall who it was. If someone knows, please post.

I didn't forget about this thread. I got busy.

[_Jersey Girl]

Just for you, Jersey Girl:

"The Latest: Cosby being taken to suburban Philadelphia jail"

I wasn't here (in the US) when this was posted. Thanks. He deserves everything he's got coming to him the miserable bastard.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

So, this is interesting. The NY'er had a lengthy article about Al Franken and his resignation in the #metoo era.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019 ... al-franken

It appears the pendulum is swinging back the other way toward a more balanced out perspective on #metoo.

Tl;dr:

The lawyer Debra Katz, who has represented Christine Blasey Ford and other sexual-harassment victims, remains troubled by Franken’s case. She contends, “The allegations levelled against Senator Franken did not warrant his forced expulsion from the Senate, particularly given the context in which most of the behavior occurred, which was in his capacity as a comedian.” She adds, “All offensive behavior should be addressed, but not all offensive behavior warrants the most severe sanction.” Katz sees Franken as a cautionary tale for the #MeToo movement. “To treat all allegations the same is not only inappropriate,” she warns. “It feeds into a backlash narrative that men are vulnerable to even frivolous allegations by women.”

The Washington Examiner, upon reading the NY'er article, decided to riff on the theme and posted this:

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opin ... ized-by-it

Democrats and liberals in the news media have found a sudden nuance when defining “sexual misconduct,” though the concept was conveniently a lot more clear-cut when a Supreme Court seat was on the line just 10 months ago.

The New Yorker’s Jane Mayer published a lengthy article Monday that all but clears disgraced former Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., of the multiple accusations of sexual assault he faced in 2017, which ultimately led to his resignation from the Senate.

Mayer offers a sympathetic ear to Franken, who believes he was wrongly shafted. She gets testimonials from Senate Democrats who have since come to regret their initial demand that Franken resign. And she casts doubt on the allegation that started Franken’s pursuit because the victim, Leeann Tweeden, may have misremembered insignificant details about the time Franken forcibly kissed her and touched her breasts while she was unconscious.

Anyway. What I find interesting is the shift from absolute devotion to #justbelieveher to 'it's more nuanced and requires a nuanced approach' that seems to be happening now. In this information saturated era, 10 months ago seems like it was the early 2000's, and it's astonishing how our mores seem to stabilize and destabilize, form and reform so quickly.

- Doc

[_MeDotOrg]

The age of consent is a line that can look different, depending on the circumstances. My girlfriend turned 18 about 9 months before I did, so during that period was she guilty of statutory rape? And if she was NOT committing a crime by having sex with me before we both turned 18, and we both have the same relative age, how is it a crime when she crosses the statutory rape dateline?

The problem becomes when the age difference becomes great. I'm not saying I'm crazy about kids having sex when they are 14 or 15, and it's hard to think of a hard a fast rule for the point where age difference becomes a crime. Let's just say it lies somewhere between one year and Judge Roy Moore.

[_subgenius]

The age of consent is a line that can look different, depending on the circumstances. My girlfriend turned 18 about 9 months before I did, so during that period was she guilty of statutory rape? And if she was NOT committing a crime by having sex with me before we both turned 18, and we both have the same relative age, how is it a crime when she crosses the statutory rape dateline?

The problem becomes when the age difference becomes great. I'm not saying I'm crazy about kids having sex when they are 14 or 15, and it's hard to think of a hard a fast rule for the point where age difference becomes a crime. Let's just say it lies somewhere between one year and Judge Roy Moore.

Romeo and Juliet laws typically prevent the circumstances you are describing being "criminal". Especially since age of consent is typically under 18...or you could live in California where a 14 year old can be married with parental consent while age of sexual consent is much higher...but why pay attention to a State sanctioned statutory rape?