18 Year Old Girl Facing Felony for Dating 15 Year Old Girl

[Ifreann]

What's unjust about protecting children from the sexual advances of adults?

An 18-year-old is (arguably) still a child (or at least an adolescent, and in this case, the 15-year-old is, I would say obviously, an adolescent), psycho-socially/emotionally. The fact that "The Law" declares someone "an adult" on the date of their 18th birthday doesn't mean that they are actually an adult in any meaningful sense.

I'd love to hear more your proposal for only extending full adult rights to people who can in some way demonstrate their adultness. It really sounds like it would be fraught with difficulties of all sorts.

[Grave_n_idle]

*excised*

*Reference purposes. *

EDIT: excised following the Hand of Mod.

[Grave_n_idle]

Yes. It is under the 'friends' and 'foes' lists. It's in your control panel.

But it only works on direct posts. If someone quotes your foe, you get to see the post.

Probably true. I think I've only ever 'ignored' two people, and I can't even remember who one of them was.

[Dusk_Kittens]

You either don't get it or are pretending not to get it.

I'm not at all saying that "She gave consent, but it's not legal consent" is a defense in the case. I'm pointing out that the law itself recognizes that there is such a thing as "consent" which is not legally recognized as "legal consent," which invalidates your repeated attempts to characterize what happened in this case as "rape." It is only "rape" in a statutory sense (do you even know what "statutory" means? hint: statute/ordinance/law), and not in any ordinary use of the term, and therefore referring to it as "rape" without the modifier "statutory" is an attempt to cloud the issue with emotively-charged language.

No, sorry - you're wrong. It's rape because there is a lack of consent - that's what rape means.

Statutory rape is still rape, and it's not doing anyone any favours to try to diminish the seriousness of sex without informed consent.

"informed consent" is a subject I've already addressed in this topic. These kids are supposed to be informed through sex ed. That's kind of the whole flipping point of sex ed, you know?

Attempting to cheapen the word "rape" by insisting that "statutory rape" is of the same seriousness as actual forced sex against someone's will is certainly doing nobody any favors.

[SatrapyofChloe]

According to your previous definitions, lesbians don't exist because females can't have sex with other females.

I wonder why do you hate lesbians and their sexuality so much to deny even their existence.

Lesbians and their asexuality are oppressed by Society.

Therefore the laws or definitions that "Society" created against them, don't count. I deny the existence of society or it's unreal laws.

Lesbians and asexuality are not social constructs. They weren't created by societies or laws, therefore they are older, and thus above any sort of laws or societies, of any nature.

You think a law or society can *turn* females lesbian?

I deny there exists any reason for their persecution. I approve of homosexuality being persecuted.
But lesbians aren't homosexual, they're asexual. So why persecute them, just because they're women and their acts are antisocial?
Well you can fuck your society and have babies with it, all you like, but that's not going to matter to people outside your society (i.e. lesbians or other antisocial asexuals).

[Farnhamia]

But it only works on direct posts. If someone quotes your foe, you get to see the post.

Probably true. I think I've only ever 'ignored' two people, and I can't even remember who one of them was.

That little flaw is why I never use it.

[Dakini]

Why not set up age of consent laws in a sensible manner? In Canada, the age of consent is 16, but there are a few close in age exceptions (12 and 13 year olds can have sex with people less than two years older than them, 14 and 15 year olds can have sex with people less than 5 years older). You can get into slightly squicky situations, but at least you're not just running around charging teenagers with felonies for dating other teenagers at their school or charging people for continuing a relationship that suddenly became illegal because one of them had a birthday.

I'm no more an expert in Canadian law than I am a giraffe, but surely if the exception is +2 years for 12 and 13 year olds, wouldn't one be breaking the law if one was, say, just turned 16 and had sex with one's still 13 year old boy-/girlfriend? Or is there another exception allowing people to age out of the range of the exceptions?

I think they go on birthdates and use "up to two years"... so the 13 year old who just turned 13 couldn't legally have sex with a 15 year old who is almost 16 in the first place.

Oh, I should also point out that 16 and 17 year olds can also only have sex with people over 18 who aren't in positions of trust or authority (e.g. no sex with teachers, doctors) or dependency and if the relationship is deemed non-exploitative (so 50 year olds can't pick up 16 year olds in chat rooms in principle).

[Cosara]

You're really new at this whole *thinking* think, are you?

I realize you are being intentionally stupid, or posing as an idiot to create a strawman argument (20/10 btw), but your futile attempt is both in vain, and redundant and oxymoronic.

I'm calling you Rapist from now,

So, Rapist,

Any more than you have a chance at intelligent debates.
You're really new at this society thing, are you?

You've already been warned once. I would not recommend that you keep this up.

[Grave_n_idle]

"informed consent" is a subject I've already addressed in this topic.

Indeed. And, I would argue, you've already been wrong.

These kids are supposed to be informed through sex ed. That's kind of the whole flipping point of sex ed, you know?

Indeed. And that's a good thing.

But it doesn't mean a kid is realistically able to give informed consent.

Attempting to cheapen the word "rape" by insisting that "statutory rape" is of the same seriousness as actual forced sex against someone's will is certainly doing nobody any favors.

I'm not cheapening the word 'rape'.

Perhaps you aren't aware of my post history - I'm one of those people that's actually argued for a death penalty on violent rape. That doesn't mean that statutory rape is not still rape, or that the one diminishes the other.

[SatrapyofChloe]

So they want to lower the age of concent, right. I don't agree.

No. They want to make female sexuality subjected to laws created exclusively by females.
So lesbians would only create laws for themselves. And by the common consent of those two girls, none of them was raped, so no lesbian would consider one of them was raped.

It's only a formality that a separate gender of females thinks the laws created by misogynists from other genders have any value to females. Or their lives and societies or actions or choices in any way. Ever.

[Neutraligon]

According to your previous definitions, lesbians don't exist because females can't have sex with other females.

I wonder why do you hate lesbians and their sexuality so much to deny even their existence.

Lesbians and their asexuality are oppressed by Society.

Therefore the laws or definitions that "Society" created against them, don't count. I deny the existence of society or it's unreal laws.

Lesbians and asexuality are not social constructs. They weren't created by societies or laws, therefore they are older, and thus above any sort of laws or societies, of any nature.

You think a law or society can *turn* females lesbian?

I deny there exists any reason for their persecution. I approve of homosexuality being persecuted.
But lesbians aren't homosexual, they're asexual. So why persecute them, just because they're women and their acts are antisocial?
Well you can fuck your society and have babies with it, all you like, but that's not going to matter to people outside your society (i.e. lesbians or other antisocial asexuals).

I think I've just read one of the stupidest posts ever. A homosexual is a person who feels attraction to a person of the same gender as them. Lesbians are females who are attracted to other females. They do not need to act on that attraction to be Lesbian, they just need to feel the attraction. Since Lesbians are people who feel attracted to those of the same gender (female), they are homosexual. Similarly a heterosexual is a person who feels attraction to people of the opposite gender. They do not need to act on that attraction, they just need to feel that attraction.

[Grave_n_idle]

You think a law or society can *turn* females lesbian?

If it can't, I'm going to want all that money I invested back.

[Ibwa]

http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2013/05/florida-teen-fighting-criminal-charges-for-same-sex-relationship/

A Florida high school senior is facing two years of house arrest, probation and a lifetime as a registered sex offender after engaging in a same-sex relationship with another student.

Kaitlyn Hunt, 18, a senior at Sebastian River High School in Sebastian, Fla., has been charged with two felony counts of “lewd and lascivious battery on a child 12 – 16 years of age” stemming from her sexual relationship with a 15-year-old girl, according to arrest records.

“She had a mutual consenting relationship with her girlfriend who is three years younger, and her parents had her arrested,” according to Kaitlyn’s mother, Kelley Hunt Smith. According to Smith, the two girls started dating when her daughter was 17. Hunt turned 18 on August 14, 2012.

“This is about two teenage high school girls who were dating, and both consenting,” Smith told LGBTQ Nation on Saturday. “They are out to destroy my daughter, because they feel like she ‘made’ their daughter gay.”

Douchebag vindictive homophobic parents + broken laws governing consent = another young person's life ruined.

Douchebagery level: Parents

they are fucking pricks, they should accept her for what she is, not shun her girlfriend for supposidly 'making her gay'.

Faith in humanity ruined.

[Dusk_Kittens]

An 18-year-old is (arguably) still a child (or at least an adolescent, and in this case, the 15-year-old is, I would say obviously, an adolescent), psycho-socially/emotionally. The fact that "The Law" declares someone "an adult" on the date of their 18th birthday doesn't mean that they are actually an adult in any meaningful sense.

viewtopic.php?p=14552567#p14552567

viewtopic.php?p=14552520#p14552520

[SatrapyofChloe]

Wrong, a person can be lesbian and never have sex.

Yes. But she cannot prove she's a lesbian. Nor can you or anyone else.
She can say it, but who's gonna believe her? No one.
Therefore, she doesn't count as a lesbian to anyone but her.
Just like it's supposed to be, since that's her individual choice, as a person. And it doesn't concern any self entitled "society".

[Ifreann]

...Attempting to cheapen the word "rape" by insisting that "statutory rape" is of the same seriousness as actual forced sex against someone's will is certainly doing nobody any favors.

You reckon? I would have figured that trying to create situations where rape isn't really rape would be the "not doing any favours" thing here.

[Dakini]

Wrong, a person can be lesbian and never have sex.

Yes. But she cannot prove she's a lesbian. Nor can you or anyone else.
She can say it, but who's gonna believe her? No one.
Therefore, she doesn't count as a lesbian to anyone but her.
Just like it's supposed to be, since that's her individual choice, as a person. And it doesn't concern any self entitled "society".

You know, if someone told me she was a lesbian, I wouldn't question her. I don't need to see proof of her lesbian-ness to assume she's not just making shit up. I mean, if she told me she's a lesbian and I saw her making out with some dude, I might be like "uh...", but that's not really my problem.

But then I'm not the kind of person who believes that people choose their sexuality or that their sexual orientation is determined by who they have fucked.

[Neutraligon]

Wrong, a person can be lesbian and never have sex.

Yes. But she cannot prove she's a lesbian. Nor can you or anyone else.
She can say it, but who's gonna believe her? No one.
Therefore, she doesn't count as a lesbian to anyone but her.
Just like it's supposed to be, since that's her individual choice, as a person. And it doesn't concern any self entitled "society".

What reason does she need to prove it? I would believe her, as would many other people since there is no reason not to believe her. She counts as a Lesbian because she claims to be a Lesbian. I am not mentioning society at all am I?

[Gravlen]

She can still get 15 years and probation, however.

I can't imagine she'll get anything close to the maximum penalty.

What about the minimum? That seems to be bad enuogh.

[Ibwa]

...Attempting to cheapen the word "rape" by insisting that "statutory rape" is of the same seriousness as actual forced sex against someone's will is certainly doing nobody any favors.

You reckon? I would have figured that trying to create situations where rape isn't really rape would be the "not doing any favours" thing here.

Rape is when some dick forcefully has sex with an unwilling subject, everything els is parents and all there "underage" bullshit

[Dusk_Kittens]

An 18-year-old is (arguably) still a child (or at least an adolescent, and in this case, the 15-year-old is, I would say obviously, an adolescent), psycho-socially/emotionally. The fact that "The Law" declares someone "an adult" on the date of their 18th birthday doesn't mean that they are actually an adult in any meaningful sense.

I'd love to hear more your proposal for only extending full adult rights to people who can in some way demonstrate their adultness. It really sounds like it would be fraught with difficulties of all sorts.

Oh, I'm sure it would. That doesn't mean it should not be attempted, however. I mean, which of the following is the purpose of law in the first place: to take the easy way out, or to promote Justice?

[SatrapyofChloe]

But a bigot like you isn't gonna do that, are you, misogynist?

Knock it off with the namecalling RIGHT NOW, SatrapyofChloe. *** Warned for flaming ***

I don't have the time or energy to sweep this thread, but SatrapyofChloe isn't the only one making direct and personal attacks. It needs to end NOW.

But wait! If one of those misogynists reported me to you, in a true whine asshole fashion, doesn't that prove they ARE misogynists?

Oops! Ok then I take back my truthful namecalling of misogynists by revealing them for what they truly are.


I've only barely seen this warning now, since the posts are numerous, so from now on I won't say it. I won't take responsibility for what I said until I saw this warning, even if it was written after your post, because I wasn't warned by those maggots in question that they'll be bitching to you.

Oh well, bitches gonna bitch. I forgive all of you. You are aborted children of a mutilated Hephaistian Misogynist God.

[Neutraligon]

You reckon? I would have figured that trying to create situations where rape isn't really rape would be the "not doing any favours" thing here.

Rape is when some dick forcefully has sex with an unwilling subject, everything els is parents and all there "underage" bullshit

Change dick to ass and i would agree. Dick implies male, and women can rape.

[Gravlen]

Yes, because holding a Lesbian accountable for Statutory Rape is horrible!

It's not even her being a lesbian. It's not like she's some sexual predator, she had a pre-existing relationship with the 15 year old and then she passed an arbitrary age barrier and suddenly this became illegal. If you want to have laws preventing 18 year olds from having sex with 15 year olds, you should totally allow an exception for "unless they were dating beforehand", because really, there isn't anything on the books in Florida preventing 17 year olds from having sex with 15 year olds (or 14 year olds for that matter) and it's asinine to act like anything should actually change.

She broke the law and got into trouble for it, what's the deal?

The fact that the younger girl's parents reported it for revenge, and the general inconsistency of Florida's consent laws (the relationship was legal before the older girl was 18 [17 and 15], but became illegal as soon as she turned 18, when it would become legal again when the younger girl turned 16 in a few months).

As far as I can see, that's not correct. The relationship was illegal even before she turned 18.

[Neutraligon]

Knock it off with the namecalling RIGHT NOW, SatrapyofChloe. *** Warned for flaming ***

I don't have the time or energy to sweep this thread, but SatrapyofChloe isn't the only one making direct and personal attacks. It needs to end NOW.

Stuff I deleted.

I strongly suggest you look over the rules of this forum our you won't be here long. viewtopic.php?f=16&t=74486