Teen Girl Sent Teen Boy 5 Inappropriate Pictures. He Faced Lifetime Registry as a 'Violent Sex Offender' or 350 Years in Jail.

[–]Rasalom72 103 points104 points105 points 9 years ago (71 children) | Copy Link

[–]mwobuddy 38 points39 points40 points 9 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

I've told people time and again, age of consent laws exist to punish males for sexual contact with females. It was designed by 19th century feminists to do just that under spurious 'anti-child-prostitution" claims, among other things (and just see how those laws destroyed child prostitution amirite?), and yet called them "young women" at the same time.

When it suits the feminist party in 1850-1920, they call them young women to give them a sense of agency and strength. Even Hillary Clinton, in the 2000's, nominated some 9 year old who ran away from her abusive husband in the middle east for "woman of the year", when she's no woman.

When it comes to possible victim, however, suddenly their status is "child" again, to those 1850-19xx feminist I described earlier.

I started about 4-5 years ago considering that there's some form of logical inconsistency in age of consent laws. Last year I was arguing on grounds that it doesn't make sense the ages are different and people are considered to have hurt someone or not based solely on arbitrary law lines. Even with the evidence and resources available to me, it still took some more arguments and reflecting to realize that what I saw was clearly a gendered law, designed to harm one side of genders and considering the other gender less capable or able.

Age of consent laws were promoted by feminists claiming that women should be equal to men, and should have the same rights and abilities, yet in contrast the age of consent law punished men and only men, underage as well, for sexual relations. As if teen females are less capable than teen males, or especially "Child-like".

Even in today's era where women love to promote the idea that women mature mentally and physically sooner, peaking at 24-25 while men take up to 28 years of age, they still promote the idea of teen females as especially vulnerable victims, and women in general are especially vulnerable or benign.

They do this every time a male who is 15 is sent to jail for sex with his girlfriend, or receives nudes from her. They do this every time they promote probation, jail closing, suspended sentences, etc, for 18-40 year old women who have sex with 12-15 year old males.

You want a link to psychologists giving women who kill their own babies a free pass in court for being under the thrall of postpartum depression? I can grant it. You want a link to psychologists, in a mainstream newspaper in the most cucked U.S. state, California (age of consent strictly 18 btw, no R&J laws), suggesting that women and only women act inappropriately with minors/children because they're victims of emotional damage, whereas men do it for boredom or fun? I can grant it.

While the law is gender neutral in all forms, as 2nd wave moderate feminism of the 60-70's period promoted, those feminists and their ideals are long dead. Feminism regressed to female exceptionalism (exceptionally better than males, exceptionally more victimized than males) that we saw with suffragettes and WW1 feminists. Gloria Steinem and Valerie Solanas promoted what appears to be a new form of feminism but is really the return to more extreme views of the original movements. Plus, have you seen the suffragette panels? Ugly-as-hell middle class women. Maybe age of consent is a twisted form of jealousy.

What do we see here? A girl sends nudes to a boy. He's arrested. Were they solicited or not? Child porn is denoted by personal judgement and ideological factors. Personal judgement is less relevant, or perhaps simply more accurate, when there's spread vaginal lips or a dildo involved, or writing on her tits that says "fuck me, so-and-so" or "your dirty little whore". But mere nudity in itself? if mere nudity was child porn, those annoying Russian Nudist Colony sites with what is clearly minors completely nude would not be capable of existing on google, let alone the internet at large.

We know that there is a legal difference between "tasteful (or nonsexual) nudity" at least as far as law goes. In my opinion, this is the only way unsoliscited nude pics from girls to guys can ever be used against guys to put them in jail without her going to jail.

It seems like its the only way girls can escape punishment. Because, yes, teen girls DO send unsolicited nude pics to guys all the time. Yet 93% of sex offender registrants who are underage are male. Either it is assumed that males somehow solicit her for her nudes, or that the nudes were sent unsolicited, but do not contain "enough" "obscenity" to register as child porn (at least to protect HER from going to jail for child porn violation), but DO factor in his going to jail because he wanks to it (e.g. he sexualized the nudity, therefore it is child porn).

This explanation is the only way I can make sense of the FACT that underage females rarely, if ever, go to jail for sending nude pics of themselves to others, OR having nude pics of underage males, while underage males always get in legal trouble for nude pics of females, or sending their nudes to underage females.

It cycles back to feminist theory that males/penises are bad, hostile, predatory, and defiling in nature, while females/female body parts are innocent, pure, and victimized. It is this theory that informed age of consent law.

Despite age of consent and child porn gender neutrality in law, underage females are rarely subject to it when they send their clit pics to some boy, or when they receive and retain dick pics of some boy. They are default victim, and as such are rarely charged with the crime when discovered. The exceptions help prove the rule.

If girls send their nudes to a guy without being asked, he can get in trouble for having those nudes, even though she did what is basically sexual harassment; sending something sexualized without someone asking for it. A dick pic sent without asking would be subject to far harsher criticism both legally and socially. Instead of that being exploratory behavior, its criminal and dangerous and disgusting.

Maybe its time to change the rules. Maybe its time to start suggesting that women's sexuality, and thus underage girls' sexuality, is all disgusting, especially when they send nudes without solicitation. If social values change, the judgements from mere human beings in the seat of judicial power would change as well.

It can be argued that this case is cut and dry because he's legally adult, but lets not kid ourselves here. The same thing would've happened to him (probably far less sentence time though) if he were the same age as her. The fact that a threat of 350 years (laughable) faces him proves that males are considered to be practically subhuman.

Look at those female teachers who not only solicit but actually FUCK A 13 - 15 YEAR OLD, send nudes to those boys, but get PROBATION or 3 years, not 350 years.

Sure, the idea is to force a plea deal, to get him to admit his guilt. Its all very Cardassian in nature; the charged is already guilty, the trial is just there to affirm the guilt and the gloriousness of the state.

350 years. That is nothing other than pure coercion to induce a guilty plea bargain, rather than allow him to fight the case at all. This is what justice is for males.

For reference: https://chnm.gmu.edu/cyh/case-studies/230

Age of consent was built to punish males for rape without the requirement of showing use of force. Age of consent was increased by feminism to 16 or 18, and it is unidirectional; only a male can be accused and convicted of it. It took until 1970 to make the law gender neutral, but the application is still in the direction of jailing the male every time, such as when a 15 year old male fucks his 15 year old girlfriend.

[–]hork23 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think the origin of the problem in the application of a gender-neutral law is that no thought of biology is put into the creation of that law (or ideology is inserted). We can have the same standard involving men and women and get two different results. The statistics of criminals going through court demonstrates this, women are better off throughout the whole process. I think this is intentional.

But from what I heard about the 70-80's standards concerning domestic violence enforcement the rates were more reflective of reality, i.e. women were being arrested, charged, and convicted in greater numbers than earlier. This scared the feminist demagogues who agitated to change the law/policy to reflect their ideology. Those changes still in gender-neutral language but designed for discrimination against a particular group, men.

If these laws about child porn didn't benefit women in some manner (or harm men more than women), I don't see them being able to exist for very long. Heck, infanticide is a thing because juries wouldn't convict mothers of murdering their children.

[–]LawBot2016 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The parent mentioned Age Of Consent. Many people, including non-native speakers, may be unfamiliar with this word. Here is the definition^(In ^beta, ^be ^kind):

The age of consent is the age at which a person is considered to be legally competent to consent to sexual acts, and is thus the minimum age of a person with whom another person is legally permitted to engage in sexual activity. The distinguishing aspect of the age of consent laws is that the person below the minimum age is regarded as the victim, and their sex partner as the offender. The term age of consent rarely appears in legal statutes. Generally, a law will instead establish the age below which it is illegal to engage in sexual activity ... [View More]

^{Note: The parent poster} ^(mwobuddy ^or ^wrez) ^can ^delete ^this ^post ^| ^FAQ

[–]Rasalom72 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Typhoon_Ashbite 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]chornu -20 points-19 points-18 points 9 years ago* (65 children) | Copy Link

[–]GreenArrow085 55 points56 points57 points 9 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link

[+]chornu -24 points-23 points-22 points 9 years ago* (32 children) | Copy Link

[–]HumaLupa8809 23 points24 points25 points 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]chornu -3 points-2 points-1 points 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]HumaLupa8809 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AppaBearSoup 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]chornu 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]mwobuddy 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AppaBearSoup 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]v573v -8 points-7 points-6 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]hork23 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]v573v 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AppaBearSoup 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]v573v 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]come_on_sense_man 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Adanu0 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[+]chornu -11 points-10 points-9 points 9 years ago* (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]Rasalom72 30 points31 points32 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]chornu 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Adanu0 15 points16 points17 points 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]Electroverted -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]chornu 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]krymz1n 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Cardplay3r 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Adanu0 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Electroverted 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]dungone 20 points21 points22 points 9 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]chornu 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]NPFFTW 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]chornu 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]dungone 14 points15 points16 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

The US has a constitution. The Constitution includes the 8th Amendment which forbids lawmakers and courts from applying cruel and unusual punishment. Prosecutors threatening a kid with 350 years in jail over having suggestive conversations with his online girlfriend is extreme and completely unreasonable any way you try to spin it. Every last thing that happened here should be protected by reasonable Romeo and Juliet laws as well as a healthy dose of discretion on the part of the prosecutors and judges involved in the case.

The US also has the 14th amendment which guarantees equal protection under the law. Why did the prosecutors not charge the girl with distribution of child pornography? Why do 40+ year old female teachers in the US routinely get lesser punishments when they actually rape multiple underage boys? This is a clear violation of one of the most fundamental concepts of US constitutional law as well as international human rights law.

What is your major malfunction here? What is your actual excuse for supporting such an unjust state of affairs?

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]dungone 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]mwobuddy 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruel_and_unusual_punishment

There are generally tests that can serve as a guide to what cruel and unusual punishment is according to various legal textbooks in accordance with the law. These are:

the frequency at which the punishment occurs in society, overall acceptance in society, severity (the punishment fits the crime), and if the punishment is arbitrary.

For what its worth, as I have repeatedly discussed regarding the arbitariness of age of consent, and the lack of consideration of extenuating factors (a 17 year old female under aage of consent aggressively pursues and fucks a 20-40 year old male, rather than being coerced or 'groomed'), and the fact that within the same, supposedly Just and Free country, the U.S. the age of consent is 16 or 18;

A Nevadian can go to prison and have their life ruined only for fucking a 15 year old. If they fuck a 16 year old they are not dehumanized and treated like the worst scum of the earth in the first world.

A Floridanian can go to prison if they fuck a 17 year old. Compared to their contemporary in Nevada, they are considered the worst scum in the world by society and law, while the person in Nevada isn't.

When close-in-age exemptions apply to allow fucking between teens; if he happens to be one year older than the exemption, he is then treated like the worst scum in the world. A single 24 hour day marks the passage from a normal healthy individual not sentenced to a life of suffering on the sex offender registry to being someone suffering like that.

I consider these, as provably arbitrary, to be cruel and unusual, yet it is policy, and because its been used so much, it has become 'usual'.

the frequency at which the punishment occurs in society, overall acceptance in society

If you're a Star Trek fan, Sex Offender registry is not much different to Discommendation; the offender loses lots of rights and privileges of society and is shunned by all, and treated as a thing, not an indivudal, a "that" rather than a "him/her/Xer"... unless, of course, the offender is a female.

Then she can speak at a women's rights rally as a celebrated individual.

[–]mwobuddy 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]LucifersHammerr 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]chornu 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]LucifersHammerr 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]chornu -3 points-2 points-1 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Rasalom72 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]chornu 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Jacobtk 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]trytoinjureme 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]deez_nuts_730 -3 points-2 points-1 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]dungone 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]chornu 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]chornu -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]RubixCubeDonut 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_unseen_one 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]factspissyouoff 48 points49 points50 points 9 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 22 points23 points24 points 9 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

[–]factspissyouoff 11 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]factspissyouoff 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]ghostboytt -10 points-9 points-8 points 9 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[+]ghostboytt -11 points-10 points-9 points 9 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[+]ghostboytt -9 points-8 points-7 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]hork23 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]ghostboytt 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]hork23 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]hork23 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"You're getting dangerously close to saying women are dumber than men"

No I'm not, that's you assuming the worst possible interpretation of my words. If the data supports a statement such as 'women have a lower IQ than man (on average)' then how the fuck is this dangerous? Oh, that's right. It's dangerous because apes like you wouldn't pay attention to the data and experimentation that suggested such a thing and would instead decide to freak out because "muh women are criticized" when someone even mentions the possibility. Is it factual or not, that's more important compared to some ideology you support.

Now as to my personal belief, I think there is something to the claim of men being smarter than women on average. This, however, was not even implied in my previous comment. I only mentioned the differences between the interests of the sexes.

"which is just a stupid and incorrect thing to say."

You say this why? Because it goes against your worldview, that men and women are the same. They are not, we're a sexually dimorphic species. Men and women have differences in their physiology, behavior, and psychology. How it is surprising or wrong to say that this might extend into intelligence?

[–]mwobuddy 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]baskandpurr 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[+]ghostboytt points 9 years ago* [recovered] (6 children) | Copy Link

Second paragraph

[–]baskandpurr 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[+]ghostboytt points 9 years ago* [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link

I have no idea who the fuck that is and I don't give a shit. I didn't came here to argue I came to point out my opinion on the topic, don't agree with it, cool. I've already been heavily downvoted in /r/twoxchromosomes for being too centrist. I thought /r/mensrights would be more open minded but I guess not.

[–]baskandpurr 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]mwobuddy 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

R&J laws don't exist in California, for instance. Even in states where it exists, it merely pleas down the legal repercussion from Felony to Misdemeanor. an R&J male still has to register as sex offender.

It doesn't apply at all when Child Porn is involved. Russian nudist colony pics abound on the internet, with 14-16 year old labias and tits hanging out everywhere.

A bra and panty covered 14 year old? That's child porn. But these nudist pictures aren't. I covered it under my long, long post in this sub thread about how child porn and (porn in general) is based on subjective judgements about intent and titillation.

If a male downloads a legal nude picture of someone underage, and they start jacking it, the picture becomes child porn because of the way in which it was used, even though the picture is not child porn and therefore not going to get the creator of it in trouble, because the intent of the creator was not to titillate.

Ironically, in this instance, as in many teen sext cases ,the intent was to titillate, but the maker does not get in trouble for sending it (being a creator, distributor of child porn), even if unsolicited, if the maker is female and underage. The only way this works is if the judge considers it like a schrodinger box; it isn't child porn when she made it (because we don't want to harm females for sexual behavior and we can make a good case that it isn't child porn using subjective claims), and it becomes child porn once the male has it and starts wanking to it. In cases where it actually WAS solicited by the male, the arguments for this duplicitous role of the picture is even easier to make. In cases where the male is legally adult, the arguments are easier still.

[–]factspissyouoff 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]mwobuddy -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]factspissyouoff 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]mwobuddy -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]magnifo 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]wrez[S] 20 points21 points22 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]hork23 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Fhwqhgads points 9 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

Male privilege.

[–]mwobuddy 6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]rg57 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]mwobuddy 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Vandechoz 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Vandechoz 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Vandechoz 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]chornu 18 points19 points20 points 9 years ago* (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]contractor808 29 points30 points31 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+]ghostboytt points 9 years ago* [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

Blame mandatory minimums and Republicans.

[–]contractor808 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Krwebb90 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]chornu 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago* (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]Krwebb90 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]chornu 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]LucifersHammerr 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]chornu -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]laid_on_the_line 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Olipyr 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]RubixCubeDonut 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Olipyr 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Krwebb90 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mwobuddy 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

but this is being falsely equated (with a heavier sentence) to raping a kid...

Feminism and SJW has pushed this agenda, starting in the 80's and 90's, with sex predator hysteria. I can go on websites and advertise I'm 40 years old and looking for a legal aged 16 year old and get a resounding cry of 'pedophile' from the masses, even presuming its legal.

I can post 'anonymous' messages telling people that the age of consent is 16 in the UK and nevada and allows people who are 60 to have sex with 16 year olds, and people will say its completely untrue and I don't know shit about the law, at a strike rate of about 60-70%. The demographic calling me full of shit is largely 14-24 aged.

It was an amusing series of exercises, but it confirms one thing I'd suspected; the age of consent, pedophilia, sex predator hysteria, has driven the meaning upward. People already equate sex with someone under the age of consent as pedophilia, and as child sex abuse. Even if that person is 17. Its like treating a 6 year old and a 15-17 year old as equals, both in terms of mental capability and possible negative repercussion. Not even comparable. For the people who love to hate and threaten to kill pedophiles, they see no difference in it at all, even if the person would've been legally capable of having that sexual relationship with their 'victim' one state away. Its not about logic, or reason. Humans like clearcut, black and white lines. Ambiguity in itself is frightening and paralyzing, maybe what galvanizes people into such a reaction. I wonder, though. Are these people really doing it for reasons of public safety, or are they simply hateful, irrational people who've found a toy with which to harm others while looking like they care about 'innocents'?

This is another reason I've been more consistent in laying out the arbitrariness of age of consent when its Nevada vs Florida; Schrodiner's 'child molester' appears when state lines determine whether someone is a normal, law abiding citizen, or a 'sick child molester', even if the act is with someone of identical age in the same areas. As most western states/countries are supposedly considered bastions of human rights, an inconsistent, and therefore arbitrary, legal judgement, with all the negative effects it incurs to the person accused and convicted, socially, legally, financially (no job for you, mr child predator!), for touching a 17 year old in Florida while someone doing so in Nevada is not harmed whatsoever, seems like a pretty big human rights violation for the defendant, if they're overage.

That is to say nothing of the much more obvious and compelling argument of human rights violation for a 17 year old teenage male getting their life fucked forever for having sex with their 17 year old girlfriend by exactly the same laws.

We need a witch hunt. Humanity is always closely related to it. When it comes in the form of dark ages sorcery, we kill them to appease god (or in tribal areas, however many gods they have), so that our society is pure, and thus we'll get mercy from plagues and storms, earthquakes, etc.

when we develop, it switches to ideologies like communism and fascism. An entire race or group of people is the source of the witch hunt; peasants in russia, Jews, etc. Kill them, to cleanse our society of the unclean who is harming us all. Sex Offender, sex predator, child molester, is the new, best witch hunt. It is best because there's no defensible argument for people like this. It is easy to lump them all together, regardless of circumstances. They are the new whipping boy of the 21st century to rid our society of its ills. There is no thinking, only gut reactions from the population when they hear the key phrases. No questioning of its value. Only the desire to see them raped or dead.

At the same time, its growing pains. Every society goes through a period of harming the hunted, and then coming to accept them as enough people get hurt by it. Jews, commies, etc. People unfairly persecuted will cause a rebound effect that will make them much less likely to be hurt. People can proclaim alignment with communist ideologies now and be called Social Justice Warriors, and be praised for believing in patriarchy and oppression, etc. Blow back from the excesses of persecution in the 50's against actors, directors, senators, etc.

As more people get on the sex offender list for fucking their girlfriends, the sex offender list will lose its meaning. But it will still hamper and damage not only society as a whole but the lives of those individuals caught in the web of these laws. How can you have a functioning society where more and more males are incapable of working in or near schools, public parks, etc? Will society start having to build specialized small, self contained villages because too many teen boys fucked their girlfriends? And what about voting?

http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/troubleshooters/Sex-Offenders-at-the-Polls-245295531.html

If there is a blowback, which seems assured, it may overreach too far. hopefully it doesn't, but it is more or less immaterial to the point that many suffering now are suffering unjustly, and we helped develop these unjust rules, and helped feed into the hysteria.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/13/student-threatened-with-sex-offender-status-commits-suicide/

http://on-suicides-deaths.blogspot.com/

http://www.centralmaine.com/2012/01/30/sex-offenderssuicide-raisesquestionsabout-treatment_2012-01-29/

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/no-justice-sex-offenses-no-matter-how-minor-or-understandable-can-ruin-you-life

if passed, these new laws would be applied indiscriminately to the entire registry, a list which includes persons convicted of public urination, teens having consensual sex, as well as serial rapists and violent pedophiles.

In California, registration is for life, a defining feature that is both revealing and confounding. Why do we treat those criminals considered the most predatory and dangerous the same as those who are not?

In 2003 the Supreme Court determined that sex offender registration is not a punitive measure but one intended to provide protection for potential victims and “regulate” released offenders. Therefore, constant changes in requirements for registrants are permitted without being seen as violating the constitutional prohibition against ex post facto.

“The cute little trick that localities are doing now is they will put a bench and watering hole on a corner and call it a 'pocket park,' forcing registrants to move,” Stein says.

Prescott says, “Notification and registration privatizes punishment: we won't put you in jail but we will make it so no one will hire you, date you, and your family will become very uncomfortable.”

Emily says, “I tried to commit suicide twice, just the shame of the label itself. Right now everyone is thrown into one category. It doesn't matter what you did. There's a lot of ignorance about it. I would keep my blinds shut, I didn't answer my door. Anytime somebody drove really slow on my street my heart would freeze.”

Whether or not Emily in this case deserves it, can you imagine that the same holds true for a 20 year old with a 17 year old girlfriend, or even a 15 year old with a 15 year old girlfriend?

And what about the shamers? Criminologist and professor Chrysanthi Leon remarked that the public spectacle of these hyper-restrictive laws is a “crucial way of signaling that we're doing something about sexual violence, when in reality we're doing very little.”

I don't know, hen-pecking the now dehumanized until they commit suicide, by serial bullying with the full weight of law and society against them, seems pretty effective at punishing sexual violence.

“I think there's something more primitive," he says. "There's something about human sexuality that engages some part of everyone so that if we can identify this group who can be the 'bad ones' around human sexuality, or the exercise of it, than maybe it lets the rest of us off the hook. We can be sexist, anti-woman; we can make our own behaviors acceptable because it's the sex offenders who are violating peoples' rights. I think there's something deeper and more profound going on that makes it difficult for people to respond in a thoughtful way.”

[–]Krwebb90 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]OgreAllOver 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]chornu 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]OgreAllOver 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ghostboytt 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]OgreAllOver 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]soparamens 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]dungone 22 points23 points24 points 9 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]soparamens -4 points-3 points-2 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]laid_on_the_line 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

You should maybe check if you are getting lost here. First of all. The USA are probably the only country with laws that are way over the top and are enforced even worse. Some states have a age of consent of 18, that is the only one in the whole western world. Actually nobody under 18 is even allowed to have sex sometimes. When a 17yo boy has a 15yo girlfriend, then he will go to prison if they have sex on his 18th birthday. In some states even if the is 17 and her birtday is the next day. That has nothing to do with pedophilia. Also that there is no differentiation in age of both parties involved. Also: Pedophilia is sex with children, which is defined pre-puberty or as somebody under 14.

Example Germany:

Children (Humans 0-13yo) are not allowed to have sex. If so then usually the parents violated their supervisory duties. If they are both under 14, they are also not legally responsible, thus nobody gets punished. Maybe child protective services have a talk with the parents.

Young adolescents (14-15) can have sex with whomever 14+ they see fit. Anybody over 18 can not exploit predicament or pay for the sex. Over 21 can not be a guardian, caretaker or teacher to the person or exploits missing sexual self determination (mostly only applicable in special cases, since until 14 everybody should know what happens when you have sex and what can be the consequences).

Adolescents 16-17 can have sex with anybody who they see fit 14+. Nobody over 18 can pay money for sex.

Adults (18+) with homever they want 14+.

Summary: With 14 they are able to go to prison for theft, murder and everything else. Why not let them have sex when they are also able to get tried for their own actions in other legal matters. Sexual education starts in third grade and you should know almost everything about how a child is made, how to prevent it and what deseases you can get by grade 6 or 7.

Edit: Ahh...ok...the girl was 13. Makes it different. Even in other countries. And he planned to have sex with her. Sex offender it is.

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]laid_on_the_line 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]laid_on_the_line 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I am not sure how "Ignorantia legis non excusat", Mistake of law and Mistake of fact (In case someone says they are 18, with fake ID, but are actually 15) are enforced in the US. I think if you had no intention of hurting anyone, not knowing the law and having no "bad conscience" until actually told that it is a crime, it should not be punished or at least not punished as hard.

Today there are usually chatlogs of conversations or something and by them law enforcement should be able to see if the defendant knows or doesn't know if it is wrong what they are doing. "But don't tell your parents/teacher/anyone"

But...not a lawyer and not USA. Never heard of anyone being punished to have sex with an adolescent except they were their parents, guardians or teachers except in the USA.

The US is fucked up when it comes to sex between young people. They really need to have some better legislation which can not be exploited so easily in either direction.

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

Age of consent is strict liability. "I didn't know her age/know it was wrong" is not an excuse that can be used in court.

The age of criminal responsibility is around 10 or 12 in UK, and similar or even around 0 in the U.S. (there isnt an established minimum age). You're supposed to know murder, theft, etc, is wrong by around age 12 anyway. But sex? Well, That's so, so dangerous right? Its so damaging and evil and so on, but we keep children completely in the dark about it, and we ignore teaching them how criminal it is.

Sex isn't like theft or murder where its obviously wrong and always taught that way to children. But they need to know its wrong, and that you can be in legal trouble for doing it. Failure to do so implies either it isn't really wrong, or the fallout and negative effects on supposed victims isn't really as bad as people make it out, or they just plain don't care about protecting children. Neither from sex (rape cause age of consent violation herpaderp), nor from becoming a victimizer of another juvenile and therefore a 'rapist' by initiating sexual contact with another.

Whats the least terrible option in all these?

If sex is wrong and bad, it should be taught that way to children so they don't violate the law.

[–]laid_on_the_line 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

Age of consent is strict liability. "I didn't know her age/know it was wrong" is not an excuse that can be used in court.

Ha. That is just fucked up. Just read an old article where a 20year old had sex with a 13yo who said she was 15. Not guilty here. Probably sex offender for life and 10 years in prison in the US. German Source

Nobody should be taught that sex is bad and/or wrong. Parents should tell their children what the law is. It is not bad to go over a red light when nobody is around, still everybody I know would wait until it is green, because their parents and teachers once told them it is forbidden. And it is not that an 17/18yo is an idiot. By that time you should know what the law says about certain things...somebody should have told you at least that you can get in real trouble when you have sex with anyone under 18 in your country.

Maybe I am just another generation from another country. I knew a lot about sex when I was 12. When I was 12 the magazine "Bravo" was on its height, sold more than a 1,4 Million copies a week, showed naked bodies of males and females (not sexual mostly, sometimes "softcore"), taught you how sex works, about masturbation, what diseases are there, how to protect yourself from diseases and pregnancy and all that without age restriction. Could buy this (nsfw) with 11, no problem. And you actually still can, but they are down to 50k per week or something, But now you have Internet, unfortunately there are not that many sites that focus on that aspect that are not blocked by the filter mommy and daddy put up to "protect" their children.

Edit: Changed the Link in the "Could buy this" as in an afterthought the previous one could have been seen as Child Porn in some countries since the naked girl was stated to be 15 and the naked boy 17.

[–]trytoinjureme 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]soparamens -5 points-4 points-3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]mwobuddy 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Hap-e 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]alclarkey 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]BeefsteakTomato -9 points-8 points-7 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]soparamens 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]BeefsteakTomato -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]BeefsteakTomato -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]McFeely_Smackup 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]laid_on_the_line 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]evanalmighty19 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]mwobuddy 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]evanalmighty19 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	Teen Girl Sent Teen Boy 5 Inappropriate Pictures. He Faced Lifetime Registry as a 'Violent Sex Offender' or 350 Years in Jail.
Author	wrez
Upvotes	364
Comments	145
Date	February 15, 2017 1:14 PM UTC (9 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/5u79hi/teen_girl_sent_teen_boy_5_inappropriate_pictures/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/teen-girl-sent-teen-boy-5-inappropriate-pictures.931900 https://theredarchive.com/post/931900

Comments