The Statutory Rape Debate:

national | gender and sexuality | opinion/analysis

Wednesday November 01, 2006 15:16

by S. Fabian

sybilfabian at yahoo dot com

Youth, Adults and Sexuality

Authoritative feminist analysis of issues around statutory rape.

The Statutory Rape Debate: Youth, Adults, and Sexuality

Statutory rape is a booby-trapped issue to begin with: a terrain densely mined with the most highly-charged emotions possible. It has everything: sex, violence, injustice, gender relations, our children's safety or exploitation, religious controversies, imprisonment; not to mention a world of knee-jerk reactions beyond our conscious control or even awareness, connected to our own childhoods, our own sexuality, our own most compelling and potentially painful experiences.

Lawmakers in particular are liable to be blinded by "fight or flight syndrome," in this dangerous territory which only experts can hope to approach intelligently, and where no one can avoid deeply offending somebody somewhere. It has us, figuratively and literally, by the short and curlies.

This is just the heady mix made to order for anyone intent on slipping unusual new measures into the criminal code, while we're all too delirious to read with utmost comprehension. It speaks volumes about how far gone we already are, when we're informed that future victims will have to be interrogated about the style of their clothes; suggesting that the new law will designate statutory rape as the official punishment for Dress Code Violations Against the State. I know the Fashion Police are out there, but this were going too far; particularly while the ideal of womanhood which corporate entertainment media shoves down the throats of world youth often resembles nothing so much as a hardened prostitute's "lap dancing" act. Taken together, these powerful adult voices bombard the young and impressionable with confusing messages indeed.

Barring indecent exposure, we all have the right to walk, look, smile, dress any way at all, any where, and at any hour of the day or night; because that is certainly no crime. The biggest challenge for we adults in this is: are we capable of rising above the waist long enough to think clearly about the needs of children and youth; or more difficult still, to really listen to their perspective?

We must all be young once
Before going further, a word about this writer's expertise here is called for: I was 14 years old in 1970. That is to say, I grew up on what I now affectionately refer to as the front lines of the Sexual Revolution. (Women above 40 may remember that as the time when we won the right to say yes, but lost the right to say no.)

Having lived through an introduction to sexuality which I wouldn't wish on anyone (although, thank God, not so awful as some have suffered,) I cast my vote most firmly that to call anything "consent" between a minor and an adult is something that neither the law, the seducers, nor even the minors themselves can be in any position to judge.

Examples from my own life are pertinent. I was fortunate. Unlike one in four little girls and grown women, no one raped me. My wild companions, young and otherwise, I now thank for that with all my prayers every day of my life. Just the same, it was wrong for grown men to try to seduce me, without the slightest thought of its effect on my young life. But no one had ever taught them why it was wrong. Someone had, however, taught them to look on my kind as "fair game."

Sex was easily passed off as "the thing to do," simply because anyone who resisted would be ridiculed by their peers as hopelessly un-hip, immature, "out of it," etc. This is a sure-fire technique for foisting unsought sexual acts on adolescents, which has never waned in its popularity and effectiveness. No one could have persuaded me at the time that I was manipulated. In that I was tragically deceived.

But all this was long after my timely, natural cries for guidance and information about sexuality had been repulsed by an adult conspiracy of silence in church, school, and parents; which moulded me unfailingly into an ideal prey. (But then, I was raised Catholic.)

Gender violence and youth exploitation
Others were not so lucky. What our social institutions are structured to conceal is that gender relations of any kind can be a very dangerous proposition indeed for the young and female. Battering and date rape are common, and often only as the most dramatic demonstrations of abusive relationships based on intimidation. One in every two wives will suffer physical violence from her husband sometime in her married life. Domestic violence is the number one cause of hospital emergency visits by women in the USA. Half of all women murdered there die within six months of leaving an abusive spouse. Three quarters of all homeless women and children are fleeing domestic abuse. That is to say, the violence by an intimate member of their household was of sufficient severity to render the shelterless street, and exposure to anything that can set upon them there, as the lesser evil.

The issue of statutory rape cannot be segregated from this larger picture of the endemic, ubiquitous, coercive violence throughout our gender relations. It is certainly interesting that the Justice Department's fiasco on this question has come so closely accompanied by certain gardí announcements that, if men commit random violence in the street, the answer is for women to stay indoors. (That is, the victims, not the offenders, should change their behaviour.)

The press’ performance
There is an unacknowledged and primitive mentality underlying much of the statutory rape debate: an assumption that the sexual impulses of adult males are sacrosanct, to the extent that everything must be sacrificed on their altar, and any act in their name, however heinous, is justified.

Much of the steamy confusion might be cleared up by distributing some of that sanctimoniousness more evenly among all parties concerned. In back-handed references to minors at risk, the daily papers have seemed to insinuate that, if a young person has a sexuality at all, then statutory rape is okay (they "asked for it," "deserved it," etc.) This double-standard, exalting the sexual needs of one class while trampling others', is characteristic of the abuser's mentality in all types of sexual assault.

The esteemed gentlemen of the press seem never to have heard that yes, like everyone else, all adolescents have a sexuality (as they themselves might say, "Like, duh!") And that this is precisely the reason why adults must be restrained from interfering with it.

Puberty is necessary
For each and every one of us, the ages between 12 and 18 represent a most critical process: the ultimate unfolding of childhood into maturity. All aspects of our physical and spiritual development then attain their full form, which will largely define our entire subsequent life. It is also a volatile time, which not all adolescents survive. It is not entertainment for adults.

A young person's sexual life belongs to themselves alone. Whatever restraints or persuasions adults wish to impose, all the king's horses and men, the thickest, highest stone walls, all the beatings, burnings and hangings of the Sexual Dark Ages have ever failed to alter the fact that it is ultimately for each person themselves to choose when and with whom to share it.

All we can hope, for the physical and emotional health of ourselves and our society, is that it will be an informed choice, freely made; without duress or undue influence which is inevitable in any transaction between unequal parties.

A new approach is needed
All that said, imprisonment is certainly a failed paradigm for dealing with sexual exploitation of children and youth. We have before us here a marvellous opportunity to address that failure. Laws could be made more fair, such as in allowing that an offender who is no more than 5 years older than the youth in question, and therefore more like a peer, should be treated differently than a 40-year-old who seeks out a 14-year-old. Public education programs, such as we've recently seen in driver safety and drinking issues, and including comparably well-produced, deeply affecting and high-exposure television spots, might go much further toward preserving youth's sexual health than any threat of imprisonment has ever done.

We have discovered, the hard way, along the terrain, that food is necessary to the general health and stability of society, because people would simply rather be shot than starve. Human sexual drive is of a comparably compelling nature, and likewise connected to survival instinct (in this case, survival of the species.) A part, if you will, of the Divine Plan: its own intrinsic nature the only example we have of the Creator’s verifiable handwriting on this. It cannot be legislated away, but only understood, and accommodated with proper respect for the basic human needs of all: not only those of a particular age, gender or class.

Without sweeping changes in our approach to the problem, adults will continue to exploit youth because they can, in a social landscape which raises more barriers than bridges to consensual relations with other adults. And youth will submit to be exploited, even without force or intimidation, because grown-ups can persuade them to, and if this is the only source of sex education their elders will offer them.

We must navigate the jungle of hysterical emotion, hypocritical superstition and cynical tittering to address the sexual health of society as a whole. We need to talk about these issues until we can do so without blushing and stammering. We need to discuss them with other adults. We need to become educated, and provide education, about how to discuss them with children, so as to serve their needs, rather than ours.

Which will be impossible until our general sexual health affords us the equilibrium to consider something other than pressing, unfulfilled needs of our own, for just a moment.

save preference

Comments (7 of 7)

The grey areas. My personal opinion on consent

by Dave

Wed Nov 01, 2006 17:06

Is it acceptable for a twelve year old gir or boyl to have sex with a twelve year old girl or boy?

In my opinion absolutely not. Children should not be having sex and are too young to experiment with their sexuality at so young an age and at so young an age masturbation should be discouraged because it probably leads to premature sexual experimentation.

Is it acceptable for a fifteen year old girl or boy to have sex with a twelve year old girl or boy?

Certainly not and I would consider the older child to be a sexual abuser and do not think the young child has any capability to consent. A fifteen year old is older and should be more responsible though they do not have the same responsibility as an adult.

Is it acceptable for a fifteen year old girl or boy to have sex with another fifteen year old girl or boy?

Again certainly not because they are children and the same logic applies for fifteen year olds as twelve year olds though fifteen year olds are more mature.

Is it acceptable for a 18 year old boy or girl to have sex with a fifteen year old girl or boy?

Absolutely not. That is sexual abuse.

Is it acceptable for an 18 year old to have sex with a 16 year old?

No. The sixteen year is still a child though there is often a significant difference between fifteen and sixteen year olds. Some sixteen year old girls and boys are fully developed whereas some others resemble twelve year olds.
But a 18 year old is an adult and therefore has power over the 16 year old child.

Is it acceptable for two 16 year olds to have sex?

No. They are far too young.

Is it acceptable for two 18 year olds to have sex?

Legally yes but I am not sure many people are comfortable when their 18 year old kids are in sexual relationships. I am certain most 18 year olds do not have the responsibility or maturity to properly raise children properly at such a young age.
Shotgun weddings do not make happy households and unhappy disfunctional parents lead to social problems for their children.

From my experience it is often in the late twenties and early thirties that most men and women have the emotional and financial stability to settle down and raise children in a secure environment which has greater likelihood of producing stable emotionally secure offspring.

Societal disfunction seems to come directly from either a history of young marriages in the past where very young husbands and wives were unable to look after their broods of children born due to sexual ignorance or the current practice of ever younger girls having babies with fathers absent. Having children at such a young age kills most educational or career opportunities for girls, leads to poorly educated poorly raised children who continue to perpetuate the cycle of ignorance neglect and social disadvantage into the next generation and the next generation.

What can be done?

I would suggest having an age of consent of 18, mandatory and fully comprehensive sex education in all schools.
This would curb the pandemic of teen sex, teen STD's and teen pregnancies.

But the reality is that the human instinct for sexual gratification is overwhelming.
Young people will not wait until they are married at the age of twenty eight or thirty to have sex.
As soon as young girls and boys reach puberty nature has designed them to procreate.

Our intellectual evolution since prehistoric times has not yet conquered primordial instincts.

Sex is not LOVE.

by catherine sara

Sun Dec 17, 2006 00:07

Well Dave all the talk here is of sex and not love.You can teach children as much as you like about sex but fail them by not explaining love.
I t is difficult as most adults do not know what love is or feels like.Oh, they think they do,but they are always searching for that something extra which is love.If parents do not experience it how can they pass it on.The church demonised sex/love because most people think they are one and the same.I t is still taboo to speak openly about sexual issues.Priests can hardly advise on it as love is alien to them too. Young people are rebelling at the moment too.But as the article points out men believe they have to CONQUER women by taking from them.I t is not their fault entirely as they have been conditioned this way for 5,000 years.Women on the other hand have been conditioned to give and give. So, it is a fact that people are playing games of control with each other and with themselves too.
Catherine

Resistance to acknowledging rape still prevalent

by Miriam Cotton - MediaBite

Fri Feb 09, 2007 12:27

There is an interesting exchange at the link below with Paul Cullen of the Irish Times about his claim in a recent article that the incidence of rape is being exaggerated by victim support groups:

http://www.mediabite.org/messageboard.html

Lashing shouty abuse about willy-nilly

by nil

Fri Feb 09, 2007 12:40

Lashing shouty abuse about willy-nilly
by Paul Cullen
"Dear oh dear, it seems to be the form that for your communications you lash abuse about willy-nilly, that private communications are put up on websites without requesting the permission of the sender and that you just don't listen. I also wonder how much interests are declared on the website but that's for another day.

If your mind is so closed there really isn't much point in communicating in this manner, but let me once more just try to explain the point I already made:"

link to full text
http://members.boardhost.com/mediabite/msg/1171009894.html

Paul throwing his toys out of the cot

by Anon

Fri Feb 09, 2007 15:12

I don't care about Paul having a hissy fit and throwing all his toys out of the cot. Or blubbing that his "private communication" with the editor was subsequently published. Or that the editor might have an undeclared "interest". Diddums. It comes with the job Paul.

But I really do care that "the only rapes that count" are the ones Paul considers valid, for whatever peculiar reason. I really do care that he is so concerned about rapists being "innocent until proven guilty". Anyone with half a brain would know that there are more than 50 rapes a year in Ireland and that rape has one of the lowest conviction rates of all crimes.

He doesn't show any concern for the 4,000 or so people raped each year in Ireland or the 400 or so people who report rape to the authorities and are then let down. He doesn't show any concern that claiming that the majority of rapists are convicted is like saying all those people are liars.

Please look at the lack of funding to trauma centres*

by c murray

Fri Feb 09, 2007 15:38

and the lack of funding to abuse shelters.*
the lack of awareness in the judicial system about providing separate
places for victims and alleged perpetrators.*

the lack of trauma/forensic nurses in the north-west.*

Underfunding of the regional and National rape crisis centres.*

then add to this:- The Rotunda centre has been tested to the limit because of the
closure in recent times of the North-west facilities.*

Its really not good enough, that the government has not addressed the issues
of sexual violence in this country, but given the general gender imbalance and
funding of the footie, the race-horses, air planes and cronies- it
would be kind of last thing on the agenda.

The Statutory Rape debate is being subsumed beneath the consent issue.
The rights of the child is being subsumed beneath the Criiminal Law (sexual
offences )Bill 2006.

They (the state) have confused rape as power -with consent.
They have not protected the pre-consent girl.
they have not protected the pre-consent boy.
Sex education is not provided as a right.

It seems to suit them to keep kids in a state of ignorance and fear.
The rights of the child under UN and EU law has not been transposed into Irish Law.
rape victims are not cared for in any meaningful way.
'x' has not been legislated for- that is an indictment agaist the state.

One generation of kids ignored within the state.
and before that how many ended up in homes and separated from their kids
because of a pervasive morality grounded in ignorance.

This state has let down a generation through an unwillingness to support the most
vulnerable within society.

again.

balance

by phm

Sat Feb 10, 2007 20:20

Legislating to protect children in a society where sex between adolescents is, if not a norm, widley practiced, is a difficult thing.

There is no doubt that few sensible people consider it a 'good thing' for 15 year olds to be having full sexual relations and the very many studies of teenage lifestyles in North America, Europe and Australia show a close corealation between early sexual activity and low educational achievment . However this link is probably due to the common cause of inadequate parenting (parents who have high ambitions for their children are most likely to be the same parents who make sure their children are supervised and productively occupied). Unfortunately, where ambition and self-respect are not instilled (and that is a feature of a substantial minority nowdays) there is little that can be done in a free society to force parental adequacy. Neither is it the purpose of the law to be a substitute parent other than in cases of extremis. If a substantial number of people choose to be irresponsible in a liberal democratic society the most the law can do is attempt to ameliorate the symptoms.

Criminalizing 15 and 16 year old boys is not a realistic option. The Guards obviously realize this because they seldom if ever prosecute consensual sex where the age difference between the sexual partners is small. A more realistic approach is to address the 'mischief ' underage sex laws are supposed to prevent. The mischief is exploitation and abuse of power. There is also a social consensus that children shouldn't be sexualized because it tends to put them in the way of such abuse.

I would introduce a law which makes consensual sex between over 15's lawful, but if one of the parties is under 18 and the other more than two years older, I would put the onus on the older partner to prove that the act was consensual, was not an abuse relative power (duress), and had no commercial element.

By the way, those who argue in these discussion-threads that the little darlings should be left 'get on with it' would find it difficult to convince any grown-up that early sexual-activity has beneficial social, health, or educational consequences for the practitioners.

Again by he way, the proposed referendum on 'childre's rights' is a load of cobblers. The only right many children lack which is not currently enshrined in law is a right to have adequate parents. Alas no referendum can address this particular deficit.

Number of comments per page

Upcoming Events

New Events

Other Press

User Preferences

Feeds

Blog Feeds

Anti-Empire

The Saker

Lockdown Skeptics

Voltaire Network

The Statutory Rape Debate:

Comments (7 of 7)