To get back to OPs second question, I think Hansons show was wrong in the sense that they gave an impression of these people being a danger to society - when in reality it was basically just sad individuals with no social abilities and obviously sexually frustrated - now in the real world its very unlikely that any of these guys would convince a fiveteen year old girl to meet them for sex (or any girl for that matter), so when the option is presented there just about desperate enough to jump on board, probably not because there pedophiles but because they havent had sex for like the last ten years (or ever).
Does that make it right? Off course not. But for them to be a threat there would have to be a real chance that fiveteen year old girls actively contact old guys on chatroom trying to get laid - which I have a hard time thinking ever happens.
There should be no penalty under law whatsoever against a young, even very young, person who desires to engage in any sexual activity with any other person who also desires it, no matter the age difference. I think the standard should be desire.
Desire can never be proven objectively to third parties, which is what is necessary in a courtroom. Desire can never work as a legal standard. Chronological age at least has the advantage that it can be proven, and that is an essential requirement for a legal standard.
That’s exactly right.. when the person saying ‘yes’ to any type of sexual act is a minor, and the person ‘asking’ is an adult.
Are you saying that a 19 yo in Japan has no idea what he’s saying, and a 19 yo. in France knows exactly what he’s saying, because one’s a minor the other an adult?
I phrased it that way because the ‘age of consent’ in America is almost always the same as the ‘age of majority.’ So when I say that a minor can’t legally give consent, I mean that in regards to the US only. In Japan the ‘age of majority’ (20) is not the same as the ‘age of consent’ (13-18).
To reiterate:
If we assume that the adult is being rational, then even if a 13 yo begs him to have sex with her, the adult should say no- given the full context of the situation. It would be irrational to do otherwise.
…under current laws (in the US, Japan, and Hong Kong as Nicky mentioned), it would be irrational to have sex with a 13 year old- for purely selfish reasons. The consequences are severe: being listed as a sex offender for the rest of your life, going to jail for a number of years, potentially becoming a mother or father, passing (or getting) an STD, not to mention potentially damaging the child involved, etc. Unless any these options appeal to you, it would be irrational to do it.
It can be proven with a “Yes” or “No” from the younger party.
But that is not proof, that is testimony. Testimony is a rather unreliable form of evidence. If it is just one person’s word against another’s then one person must be lying and other evidence must be found.
Well, I suppose we’ll never know then, just like with all sexual encounters, without actual recorded evidence. Edit: Even with a recording, a context would have to be established based on testimony.
I don’t know. Take this scenario: 18 yr old dating a 17 yr old -> parents catch them in the act -> 18 yr old is charged with statutory rape -> 18 yr old is listed as a sex offender for the rest of his life.
I didn’t realize that even someone committing a so-called offence as young as 12 can end up on the sex-offender’s list. Even if the facts aren’t quite as reported in that story, surely the “culprit” does not belong on a list. Like with many drug-related crimes, the general public ignores the injustice.