Akhlut wrote:Edi wrote:Are you three done yet? Because if you had bothered to fucking read the previous thread, you would know that there is a big difference between an adult female having sex with an adolescent male and and adult male having sex with an adolescent female
or male.
See here. There was a big fucking flamewar ovber the subject, and I'd ratehr not have to go through it a second time. While the woman is a pedophile, the case is very unusual and in no way like a standard molestation case. The sentence was decided on the grounds of harm caused, which is why it's so light. There's nothing wrong with it.
Edi
I call bullshit. If it were a 28 year old male teacher giving oral sex to a either a male or female student that was 13 years old, he'd still be rotting in prison being attacked by murderers, rapists, and other assorted thugs for being a child molester.
Yes, he would. How the fuck does your ignorance address the points I made?
Akhlut wrote:And would you be okay if a 28 year old male teacher gave oral sex to his students?
Did you fucking read the thread I linked to, asshole? Did you take a look at what I said there? EVERYTHING I said there? No, I would not be okay with that for several reasons. I'm not okay with what this female teacher did either, but I'm a lot less bothered by it than I would be if a male teacher did the same to a female student. The situation is not even analoguous, by the way. In order to have sex, the male must be active, but the female need not be.
Akhlut wrote:I mean, he's not causing any physical harm, right? So it's all well and good then, right? He should get sentencing that is just as light as this teacher, right?
He wouldn't be causing physical harm, no. Psychological harm is another thing entirely and more difficult to find out. But if you think that male pedophiles would be content with just that without getting their rocks off, you're either unbelieveably naive, unbelievably stupid or just a plain dishonest lying little shit. And if by some miracle it was that kind of a hypothetical situation, then the sentence for the crime should obviously be a lot less than if he had had intercourse with the kids. What the fuck is so difficult to understand about that?
Rogue 9 wrote:How woefully inconsistent with equal protection before the law. The matter stands that the same charge would bring a vastly different sentence were the defendent male. This is a problem, no matter how much anyone hems and haws about how the boy doubtlessly wanted sex; the sentencing is about the crime she was charged with, not the attitude of the victim.
What the fuck is YOUR problem? Did somebody slip an extra dose of stupid into your morning coffee? This sentencing is in no way inconsistent with equal protection before the law. The sentence would be vastly different for a male defendant, because in the case of a male defendant the fucking facts of the case would be vastly different.
In case you didn't know, it takes goddamn active effort and desire on part of a male to sustain an erection and have sex, while there is no similar requirement for a female. But it wouldn't be much of a surprise to find that you have no firsthand knowledge of such basics of reproductive biology. So if the boy did have sexual intercourse with the woman, and 15 times no less according to the info on the case, it is a clear indication that he did want to do it. In the case of a male defendant, it was obvious that the defendant wanted it, but there is no such automatic knowledge about the victim. The evidence of who was actively pursuing the sexual activity is important for that reason, and the evidence is easiest to find about male activity for obvious reasons.
Furthermore, like it or not, the laws dealing with pedophilia have been drafted with the assumption that the offender is male, because in the great, vast majority of cases the offenders
are male. Consequently, anomalous situations like this will produce anomalous sentences compared to the norm.
The only case with a male defendant analoguous to this one would be the extremely rare case of a homosexual male teacher getting his ass pounded by a homosexual student and where the teacher did not penetrate the boy. That sort of situation would merit this kind of light sentence.
Edi
