Judge questions why ‘only the boy’ is charged in underage sex case - Polidicks

[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ef/Age_of_Consent.png[/img] I think most people don't realize just how low the age of consent is in most of the world. Not a single EU member state has an age of consent as high as 18, even 16 is relatively rare in Europe. Everyone talks as if a lower AOC would lead to a catastrophe, forgetting that many liberal first world nations currently operate with such laws.

[QUOTE=booster;44934378]18 as age of consent just leads to unnecessary problems like this. 16 seems like a "reasonable" age.[/QUOTE] I think 16 is the legal age over here in Blighty, last time I checked. Yep, still is. A fair balance despite certain groups requesting a drop to 14, which might work for Japan but probably not for England.

[QUOTE=Cuon Alpinus;44934457]16 is legal in my US state so long as you're within a few years of age of your partner.[/QUOTE] Most states have romeo and Juliette laws which give some protection for exactly these cases, however for some unknown reason male/male female/female cases are considered pediphilia [editline]29th May 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Crash155;44939052]The fuck? I honestly don't see why two consenting teenagers should be charged at all. What point are they trying to make by charging them? Are they upset a teenager gets more action than them?[/QUOTE] Because the girls mother is angry that her daughter had a sex life, and she vowed to ruin the boys life by getting him charged for rape. No lawyer should take a case like this when its clearly a vindictive lawsuit

America: Where it's illegal and punishable by law to have sex if you and your partner are both under the age of 18. Yeah freedom woo

Charging teens for consensual fucks. What a way to ruin their lives.

I'm glad the judge looked at the situation and was able to come to a reasonable conclusion.

[QUOTE=Mitsudigi;44934369]Does that law help even a little? Back in high school around here you were basically shamed if you were still a virgin past 14-15.[/QUOTE] It's completely outdated and the entire legal system regarding the issue of underage sex needs reform.

[QUOTE=BrickInHead;44938833]women not being taken seriously enough to be tried for rape crimes is a part of the patriarchy i mean in this case individuals under the age of consent shouldn't be tried in the first place unless there's a significant element of coercion but whatever[/QUOTE] I swear that what feminism stops or helps with, and what the patriachy does gets larger and larger every single day. eventually every single dictionary entry is going to contain '-caused by the patriachy' or '-fought by feminism' because for some reason facepunch users seem to think that they can use both as a catch-all term instead of the actual words of 'human rights activism/egalitarianism' and 'society'.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;44941397]I swear that what feminism stops or helps with, and what the patriachy does gets larger and larger every single day. eventually every single dictionary entry is going to contain '-caused by the patriachy' or '-fought by feminism'[/QUOTE] He's right though; the idea that men can't be raped by women is caused by the patriarchy. If society didn't expect men to be dominant, violence-fueled automatons (somewhat exaggerated but you get the point) then people would be more inclined to take rape charges against women seriously.

[QUOTE=deltasquid;44941415]He's right though; the idea that men can't be raped by women is caused by the patriarchy. If society didn't expect men to be dominant, violence-fueled automatons (somewhat exaggerated but you get the point) then people would be more inclined to take rape charges against women seriously.[/QUOTE]Why do you call it patriarchy? That term is totally wrong in this context. Society causes expectations. Society is shaped by both men and women. And it is definitely not patriarchy that holds the idea that men can't be raped.

[QUOTE=deltasquid;44941415]He's right though; the idea that men can't be raped by women is caused by the patriarchy. If society didn't expect men to be dominant, violence-fueled automatons (somewhat exaggerated but you get the point) then people would be more inclined to take rape charges against women seriously.[/QUOTE] you've used patriachy and society interchangeably in your post this is my problem with the terminology. You can effectively swap out one for either, and you'll still end up saying [I]the same thing [/I] like, this is entirely a language thing, but by using patriachy in this way you effectively render it absolutely identical to society. In these discussions, all that basically happens is the term patriachy is used when talking about gender issues with society.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;44941471]you've used patriachy and society interchangeably in your post this is my problem with the terminology. You can effectively swap out one for either, and you'll still end up saying [I]the same thing [/I] like, this is entirely a language thing, but by using patriachy in this way you effectively render it absolutely identical to society. In these discussions, all that basically happens is the term patriachy is used when talking about gender issues with society.[/QUOTE] Kyriarchy would be a more useful term as it covers all forms of oppression not just gender based oppression.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;44941471]you've used patriachy and society interchangeably in your post this is my problem with the terminology. You can effectively swap out one for either, and you'll still end up saying [I]the same thing [/I] like, this is entirely a language thing, but by using patriachy in this way you effectively render it absolutely identical to society. In these discussions, all that basically happens is the term patriachy is used when talking about gender issues with society.[/QUOTE] Patriarchy is the belief that men are or should be the dominant sex. Not all societies are patriarchies and ours is trying to not be one, but it still is on a lot of fronts. EDIT: patriarchy isn't some plot or conscious ideal people have, it's a facet of our society, if that's clearer. It harms both men and women.

[QUOTE=Aidan_088;44939333][img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ef/Age_of_Consent.png[/img] I think most people don't realize just how low the age of consent is in most of the world. Not a single EU member state has an age of consent as high as 18, even 16 is relatively rare in Europe. Everyone talks as if a lower AOC would lead to a catastrophe, forgetting that many liberal first world nations currently operate with such laws.[/QUOTE] That's because the EU essentially has two ages of consent in a sense. While the US only has one in a sense. (sex vs porn, marriage and essentially adulthood) [QUOTE=BrickInHead;44938833]women not being taken seriously enough to be tried for rape crimes is a part of the patriarchy i mean in this case individuals under the age of consent shouldn't be tried in the first place unless there's a significant element of coercion but whatever[/QUOTE] It's less of an issue with the state in this case actually as with the person who usually tries to file similar charges. It's usually the girls parents and the prosecutor tends to try create a shield for the person bringing in the charge. It happens in other cases as well.

[QUOTE=deltasquid;44941788]Patriarchy is the belief that men are or should be the dominant sex. Not all societies are patriarchies and ours is trying to not be one, but it still is on a lot of fronts. EDIT: patriarchy isn't some plot or conscious ideal people have, it's a facet of our society, if that's clearer. It harms both men and women.[/QUOTE] The Patriarchy is a reductionist and irrelevant concept. For example, A homeless man is far more oppressed by society than a wealthy women is. Race and age are also potential forms for oppression all of which is not adequately covered by the concept of the "patriarchy". We may live in a patriarchal system but to attribute everything to the patriarchy and attempt to stretch its meaning is both unproductive and unnecessary. The Kyriarchy should be the focus, it's a much more inclusive and useful concept.

The laws regarding this subject here are outdated as hell, but any suggestion to either lower the AOC or change how the laws work will get you labeled a pedophile.

[QUOTE=wraithcat;44941945]That's because the EU essentially has two ages of consent in a sense. While the US only has one in a sense. (sex vs porn, marriage and essentially adulthood) [/QUOTE] Both the US and all European nations have separate ages for sexual consent, porn, marriage and adulthood. The ages sometimes coincide but they are still covered by different laws.

[QUOTE=deltasquid;44941788]Patriarchy is the belief that men are or should be the dominant sex. Not all societies are patriarchies and ours is trying to not be one, but it still is on a lot of fronts. EDIT: patriarchy isn't some plot or conscious ideal people have, it's a facet of our society, if that's clearer. It harms both men and women.[/QUOTE] there is nothing in the story that puts forward the idea that men are or should be the dominant sex. so this story does not fit your definition of patriarchy. if it harms both men and women, then why not call it what it is. Society. Society ALREADY means everything that people are using patriachy to mean in cases like this. If you're talking about society benefitting men, by all means call it the patriachy, but in these cases, the terminology is just redundant. once again, you're using patriachy to mean society but used in a discussion about gender.

[QUOTE=Telepethi;44941239]America: Where it's illegal and punishable by law to have sex if you and your partner are both under the age of 18. Yeah freedom woo[/QUOTE] except this story is in Australia and also every state is different in their age of consent laws and punishments woo

[QUOTE=Venezuelan;44942223]except this story is in Australia and also every state is different in their age of consent laws and punishments woo[/QUOTE] Oh, that explains why the judge actually thought about the case. Over here, the boy would be branded a monster and have his life ruined.

[QUOTE=Telepethi;44941239]America: Where it's illegal and punishable by law to have sex if you and your partner are both under the age of 18. Yeah freedom woo[/QUOTE] This article is from Australia. Still you'd think there would be some sort of "Romeo Juliet" clause to the law like some other countries have. It sounds absurd to charge both of them unless they're actively trying to control the population there.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;44942182]there is nothing in the story that puts forward the idea that men are or should be the dominant sex. so this story does not fit your definition of patriarchy. if it harms both men and women, then why not call it what it is. Society. Society ALREADY means everything that people are using patriachy to mean in cases like this. If you're talking about society benefitting men, by all means call it the patriachy, but in these cases, the terminology is just redundant. once again, you're using patriachy to mean society but used in a discussion about gender.[/QUOTE] There is, though. the Judge questions why only boys are punished for statutory rape. He is directly addressing a symptom of the patriarchy: the idea that the boy coerced the underage girl into sex, even though they were both underage and he probably did not coerce her at all. Patriarchy does not only benefit men. If a man is told to "suck it up" when he is depressed, that is patriarchy, and it is harmful. Society does encompass patriarchy, and it is true that in a sense society is the ones that harms men and women, but society also encompasses a much wider range of topics such as democracy, the rule of law, capitalism... Which are not relevant in this discussion. Hence why I (and many others, mind you) use patriarchy to specifically address the facet of society that enforces clear-cut gender roles and expectations on men and women. So to answer your last sentence: yes, I am using patriarchy, because the patriarchy is that part of our society that the judge in this article is addressing.

[QUOTE=deltasquid;44942516]There is, though. the Judge questions why only boys are punished for statutory rape. He is directly addressing a symptom of the patriarchy: the idea that the boy coerced the underage girl into sex, even though they were both underage and he probably did not coerce her at all. Patriarchy does not only benefit men. If a man is told to "suck it up" when he is depressed, that is patriarchy, and it is harmful. Society does encompass patriarchy, and it is true that in a sense society is the ones that harms men and women, but society also encompasses a much wider range of topics such as democracy, the rule of law, capitalism... Which are not relevant in this discussion. Hence why I (and many others, mind you) use patriarchy to specifically address the facet of society that enforces clear-cut gender roles and expectations on men and women. So to answer your last sentence: yes, I am using patriarchy, because the patriarchy is that part of our society that the judge in this article is addressing.[/QUOTE] I disagree. This judge is addressing what is more of a legal precedent than a 'symptom of the patriarchy'. While this legal precedent could be the result of that symptom, I highly doubt that is the case anymore. Even if the society suddenly turned egalitarian overnight, that legal precedent would still be there. 'Society' does not encompass topics. Society is an entity - there are topics that are relevant to society, but mentioning society in this case does not unnecessarily bring in topics that aren't relevant. If you were to say in this thread 'This is a result of society', I don't think anyone would suddenly believe you're talking about property rights. Once again, I disagree. The patriarchy is not what this judge is addressing. He is judging legal precedent. That is why he doesn't talk about society, and why he expressly mentions court rulings throughout the article. The only thing that mentioning the patriarchy does in this case is make people go 'why is he talking about the patriarchy when the guy here is the one who is disadvantaged'. If you had said 'society', a concept that is pretty clearly conceived and clear, I think everyone would have been on the level. But because you've used the word patriarchy, even though you've used it to mean exactly the same thing as society, you've already confused your point. furthermore, you still haven't given me a clear definition of what the patriarchy IS in this situation. You're telling me that it enforces clear cut gender roles, but you haven't said what it is yet (other than it is men wanting to be the dominant sex, which just doesn't fit the bill here)

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;44942776] (other than it is men wanting to be the dominant sex, which just doesn't fit the bill here)[/QUOTE] Not what I said. There literally isn't anything I could do but give you a dictionary and some feminism 101 but I'm sure you could go and find that yourself, really. As for the judge discussing legal precedents, this is from the OP: [quote]A DISTRICT Court judge has said he “always wondered why only the boy is charged” with having sex under the age of consent.[/quote] The answer to his question ("Why is only the boy charged?") is quite simply because "Due to the patriarchy in our society, men are assumed to be the aggressors and women are assumed to be the victims". It's as simple as that, and yes, these legal precedents were obviously caused by the patriarchy in our society.

[QUOTE=deltasquid;44942938]Not what I said. There literally isn't anything I could do but give you a dictionary and some feminism 101 but I'm sure you could go and find that yourself, really.[/QUOTE] or you could give me what you believe the patriarchy to actually [I]be[/I] I'm not interested in what feminism 101 thinks or what the dictionary thinks, I want to know you think

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;44942951]or you could give me what you believe the patriarchy to actually [I]be[/I] I'm not interested in what feminism 101 thinks or what the dictionary thinks, I want to know you think[/QUOTE] To me, patriarchy is that part in our society that enforces the gender roles such as "men are aggressive, dominant and stoic, while women are nurturing, obedient and emotional", amongst other typically masculine/feminine ideals. EDIT: But maybe it might be better if you gave your definition of patriarchy, because it seems you believe that patriarchy only benefits men, which is clearly not the case.

[QUOTE=deltasquid;44942988]To me, patriarchy is that part in our society that enforces the gender roles such as "men are aggressive, dominant and stoic, while women are nurturing, obedient and emotional", amongst other typically masculine/feminine ideals. EDIT: But maybe it might be better if you gave your definition of patriarchy, because it seems you believe that patriarchy only benefits men, which is clearly not the case.[/QUOTE] [quote]Patriarchy is the belief that men are or should be the dominant sex.[/quote] this is what you said.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;44943044]this is what you said.[/QUOTE] Yeah, which is only partly true now that I think about it and I apologize for that. The idea that men are or should be the dominant sex is still part of the patriarchy, but not all of it. I guess it's fairer to say that it's a result of the thought that men are dominant or go-getter and that women are not (or shouldn't be).

[QUOTE=deltasquid;44943105]Yeah, which is only partly true now that I think about it and I apologize for that. The idea that men are or should be the dominant sex is still part of the patriarchy, but not all of it. I guess it's fairer to say that it's a result of the thought that men are dominant or go-getter and that women are not (or shouldn't be).[/QUOTE] right, I totally understand that, but this was already a concept within society. Gender roles being societal is something that already existed BEFORE the patriarchy thing came about, so I don't see it as adding anything

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;44942776] furthermore, you still haven't given me a clear definition of what the patriarchy IS in this situation. You're telling me that it enforces clear cut gender roles, but you haven't said what it is yet (other than it is men wanting to be the dominant sex, which just doesn't fit the bill here)[/QUOTE] Generally speaking, in a case like this, the argument is, that a patriarchal society will create a higher standard of protection for women. Not because the system likes women more, but because the system is set up as if women required more protection than men, because they were the weaker sex which cannot protect itself. In a lot of ways this protection argument can be used on limiting the one side remove the right for expression of the weaker side - they require protecting, of course they can't really handle their own things right? Let alone any leadership roles etc etc The thing to keep in mind though is, that this is a society construct as opposed to what individuals might or might not believe. Hence you often have women enforcing the system itself. Overall calling it a patriarchal system seems wrong from a language standpoint to me, but it is often a system that does attempt to paint women as the side in need of more protection. [QUOTE=Cloak Raider;44943128]right, I totally understand that, but this was already a concept within society. Gender roles being societal is something that already existed BEFORE the patriarchy thing came about, so I don't see it as adding anything[/QUOTE] Because gender roles have a lot to do with the society in place. In matriarchal societies, it is often men who are considered in need of heightened protection, because they are foolish. In patriarchal, these tend to be women. Or not precisely gender roles, but the way genders are perceived. Society and patriarchy or matriarchy aren't discrete and seperate things. A patriarchy is merely a type of society. [QUOTE=deltasquid;44942988]To me, patriarchy is that part in our society that enforces the gender roles such as "men are aggressive, dominant and stoic, while women are nurturing, obedient and emotional", amongst other typically masculine/feminine ideals. EDIT: But maybe it might be better if you gave your definition of patriarchy, because it seems you believe that patriarchy only benefits men, which is clearly not the case.[/QUOTE] Not precisely. A matriarchal society can enforce gender roles just as much and it can actually use most of the same gender roles even. Women are nurturing, empathic, motherhood cult etc etc etc so they are in the leadership position. Men are foolishly aggressive so they need to be protected from bad decisions by women. Pretty much same gender concepts, just from an alternative primus position.