Statutory Rape: Felony or Rite of Passage?
My biggest beef of the nite involves the pathetic conclusion to the Debra LaFave case. I'm fed up with the gender hypocrisy and antiquated stereotypes plaguing American views on statutory rape. This was a clear case of a sane adult woman having sex with a 14 year-old minor for pure lust and adventure. When a grizzled old man does this, he gets labeled a sex offender for life and serves 15-25 years in prison. Why is this any different?
Girls are considered pure, innocent, easily corrupted by older men, and largely incapable of making autonomous sexual decisions. Boys, on the other hand, will be boys. Experimentation and landing an older woman is part of the learning curve and ammo for bragging rights, not a traumatic experience. It's unfair and contrary to what social science teaches us. Girls, on average, attain sexual and social maturity faster than boys. Chalking aberrant behavior up to some strange notion of "seduction" is absurdity. Seduction typically involves "enticing someone astray from right behavior or just winning love or sexual favors from someone." Why is the man always the seducer? This is just not the reality of modern relationships. Women and men have free will to have sex with who they want. I'm not going to sit here and say 14 year-olds can freely consent, but there should be consistency in determining what sexual deeds go unpunished and which result in the ruination of lives. In my eyes, no 19 year-old boy engaging in sexual activity with a 16 year-old girl should be demonized, while a 25 year-old woman who mounts a 14 year-old boy gets rewarded with a 6 figure nude-modeling contract.
Is anything more illustrative of these bemoaned stereotypes than the defense tactics in this case? First, they began by repeatedly referring to LaFave's fragile nature and potential for abuse due to her attractive appearance. Those pleas frequently succeed when male pedophiles enter prison and are violently assaulted by inmates. Next, LaFave claimed insanity. I believe this related to the tangential excuses regarding her "bipolar disorder;" but without expert testimony, no trauma or any intoxication, that had no chance of success. Plus, she had sex with the boy several times (even in the presence of other students). In any event, courts have repeatedly emphasized strict liability on knowledge requirements regarding sexual relations with minors in the past, so I don't see why it wouldn't extend these rigid standards to any contrived excuse Ms. LaFave might make. But alas, a plea deal with no jail time was struck. The reasonable judge, seeing the immense hypocrisy and admissions of guilt by Ms. LaFave, found the plea deal unconscionable. After all, how can one concede guilt to statutory rape and only end up with probation? Finally, the victim just gave up and preferred to not testify rather than put LaFave behind bars.
Let me be clear, I'm not necessarily saying LaFave should be serving 20 years or walking free. I just want a system where the same penalties are handed out to offenders regardless of gender. If the media and prosecutors are unwilling to comply, I'd hope fair-minded feminists and legal scholars would agree with me. Otherwise, I may be forced to conclude these actors may be operating with Machiavellian goals of destroying any and all paternalistic influences in our society without regard to fairness and consistency. And we all know that isn't the case, right?
Girls are considered pure, innocent, easily corrupted by older men, and largely incapable of making autonomous sexual decisions. Boys, on the other hand, will be boys. Experimentation and landing an older woman is part of the learning curve and ammo for bragging rights, not a traumatic experience. It's unfair and contrary to what social science teaches us. Girls, on average, attain sexual and social maturity faster than boys. Chalking aberrant behavior up to some strange notion of "seduction" is absurdity. Seduction typically involves "enticing someone astray from right behavior or just winning love or sexual favors from someone." Why is the man always the seducer? This is just not the reality of modern relationships. Women and men have free will to have sex with who they want. I'm not going to sit here and say 14 year-olds can freely consent, but there should be consistency in determining what sexual deeds go unpunished and which result in the ruination of lives. In my eyes, no 19 year-old boy engaging in sexual activity with a 16 year-old girl should be demonized, while a 25 year-old woman who mounts a 14 year-old boy gets rewarded with a 6 figure nude-modeling contract.
Is anything more illustrative of these bemoaned stereotypes than the defense tactics in this case? First, they began by repeatedly referring to LaFave's fragile nature and potential for abuse due to her attractive appearance. Those pleas frequently succeed when male pedophiles enter prison and are violently assaulted by inmates. Next, LaFave claimed insanity. I believe this related to the tangential excuses regarding her "bipolar disorder;" but without expert testimony, no trauma or any intoxication, that had no chance of success. Plus, she had sex with the boy several times (even in the presence of other students). In any event, courts have repeatedly emphasized strict liability on knowledge requirements regarding sexual relations with minors in the past, so I don't see why it wouldn't extend these rigid standards to any contrived excuse Ms. LaFave might make. But alas, a plea deal with no jail time was struck. The reasonable judge, seeing the immense hypocrisy and admissions of guilt by Ms. LaFave, found the plea deal unconscionable. After all, how can one concede guilt to statutory rape and only end up with probation? Finally, the victim just gave up and preferred to not testify rather than put LaFave behind bars.
Let me be clear, I'm not necessarily saying LaFave should be serving 20 years or walking free. I just want a system where the same penalties are handed out to offenders regardless of gender. If the media and prosecutors are unwilling to comply, I'd hope fair-minded feminists and legal scholars would agree with me. Otherwise, I may be forced to conclude these actors may be operating with Machiavellian goals of destroying any and all paternalistic influences in our society without regard to fairness and consistency. And we all know that isn't the case, right?
posted by The Eminent Gadfly at 1:10 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home