We've lost our minds

[Atekimogus]

From what I understand, that would require a law change as its currently written that the male offender always takes full blame over the female. If it's same sex, it's the age that determines. As I understand it that is.

So even if the boy would have been younger by a few weeks and seduced by the girl he would still be the one prosecuted and not the girl? What is the rational behind that?

Isn't it be more or less accepted, that girls on average are mentally more mature than boys at that age?

[Mikey]

Yes, but there's still a very old double standard entrenched in the mindset of America, which states that girls are delicate flowers who need to be protected and sheltered; while boys are sexual predators who can barely control themselves, and yet are to be encouraged and congratulated for their proclivities.

In other news, let's continue to stifle and pervert our children's natural growth - we'll wind up with a nation full of Robert Strouds.

[Reliant121]

From what I understand, that would require a law change as its currently written that the male offender always takes full blame over the female. If it's same sex, it's the age that determines. As I understand it that is.

So even if the boy would have been younger by a few weeks and seduced by the girl he would still be the one prosecuted and not the girl? What is the rational behind that?

Isn't it be more or less accepted, that girls on average are mentally more mature than boys at that age?

Dear lord man, are you actually suggesting that a female be held responsible? Blimey, everyone knows that teenage males are the spawn of satan himself and cannot control their genitalia or any other part of themselves for that matter, damn right they should take the blame!

[Lighthawk]

This whole thing is utterly ridiculous. What they're basically saying is that nobody can engage in any social activity that might go beyond "being friends" until they're both of the age of consent (what is that over there anyway? 16? 18?). Yeah, because that's going to lead to a healthy social life and confidence around the opposite (or same, in some cases) sex, right?

What's next? Are they going to start arresting any teenagers that have boyfriends or girlfriends? Because that's the exact same logic that they're using for this case.

What's frightening is that seems to be the direction we're heading. Hell, it's the USA's mindset with alcohol. "NOT A SINGLE FUCKING DROP UNTIL YOU'RE 21! DRINKING BEFORE THEN IS IMMORAL TO THE POINT OF MAKING SATAN WEEP!"

Does anyone really wonder why we have so many drinking problems here? And teen pregnancy? How ever could that be a issue when we so clearly and utterly forbid teens to engage in the slightest sexual contact of any sort to the point of outright pretending teens don't even think about sex so that we can avoid the uncomfortable truth and thus get out of actually having to teach our maturing children anything about sex and the consequences that might come with it?

[Reliant121]

Case in point would be the way our drinking culture differs from the continental cultures. Our alcohol behavior is not quite as strict as the one Mikey details, but we are certainly a culture reticent to give children alcohol, let them understand it etc. In turn, when they get it they have no idea how to drink responsibly hence the binging. The Europeans introduce alcohol to their children at a very young age, get them accustomed to having it in controlled ways with dinner or in evenings. And high consumption of alcohol is reduced. It may have changed now, but it was certainly far less prevalent when we were there.

[Tyyr]

Anyone here with experience with teenagers know the quickest way to get one to do something?

Forbid them to do it.

[Mikey]

Anyone here with experience with teenagers know the quickest way to get one to do something?

Forbid them to do it.

Exactly - and, as Relaint says, in the bargain you get to make sure that they have no idea what they're doing when they do it.

[Reliant121]

A great example, perhaps rather extreme, was a fellow my dad worked with when he was working for Southampton City Council. This particular guy was an extremely intelligent, and extraordinarily talented master of music and he wished only to teach it. He was so innately good, and qualified, he went straight from university into a highly paid private school. He had come through a catholic school himself, never given sex-ed/right and wrong "Personal Development Learning" lessons that an every day state schooler or even standard private schooler would be fortuitous enough to get. And so, he had never really understood the problem when he entered into a relationship with one of his students. Subsequently, he was subject to the sex offenders register, struck from the record and never allowed near a child again.

Because he never learned what sex IS or why it is deemed wrong to engage in it with a student.

I admit, that the specifics and circumstances are a little bit different, more extreme, definitely more criminal. But the reason, the fundamental flaw in his knowledge is the same: The refusal of those who teach. In his case, the catholic school included no teaching about sex education and the right/wrong of certain elements. In the case of the OP, the child would likely not have been taught what it actually is, let alone the legality around it.

[Mikey]

Kind of an aside, Reliant... but the fellow in your anecdote; did he never have a parent or legal guardian at all?

[Reliant121]

Ah, I forgot to mention it was a boarding catholic school. Typical elite of society treatment, cart him off to a school so they don't have to deal with him. After he was taken into the "social system" in Southampton district (I think it was around Itchin, although it's been a year since it happened around 7 months before dad "unwinded" about the job).

Safe to say, the parents virtually disowned him. Saving face.

[Mikey]

Well, they may have tried to wash their hands of their parental responsibility, but I can't discount their role. I certainly couldn't expect the schools or other entities of the state to teach my kids something that I'm not willing to teach them.

[Tyyr]

I dunno Reliant. I can see someone young being a bit confused but given the culture I'd think that a grown man would understand that you don't screw around with students.

[Mikey]

I dunno Reliant. I can see someone young being a bit confused but given the culture I'd think that a grown man would understand that you don't screw around with students.

Not if he learned his sexual mores from priests.

[Reliant121]

A lot of our super ostentatious private schools require the teachers to live on site in their contract. Having been tutored in an incredibly closed society in the boarding school, he went straight back into one.

[Mark]

Most of the parents today that I've met with kids right around that age, are loosly in my age range (mid thirties or so), and they seem to forget what we were doing at that age.

My oldest girl, Tiffany (the one who lives in Las Vegas), was talking to me about her boyfriend that broke her heart (they get their hearts broken every week, I swear) because he did "something done that I don't wanna know about". My first thought is the twit was getting high or something (consider the source of course), so when I pressed her she said "this girl in class did something with her mouth". I of course blurt out, "He got a b--w j-b?" He gasps and asks how I know about that.

I had to ask if she though her generation invented them. Most parents today seem to forget that they were doing the same damned thing at the same damned age. Hell, I was hitting homeruns in the girls locker room during class back in the day. I, like Mikey, would have probably gotten the chair today.

I told my daughter, when she confessed she'd kissed a boy, "I'm not thrilled by the idea, but since people don't generally get pregnant with their pants on..." she got the hint and said "eewww.....dad, not till collage."

I can only hope.