General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Tennessee Supreme Court Considers Whether Minor Is An Accomplice In Her Own Statutory Rape [View all]nobody_special
(6 posts)I normally only read DU and don't actively participate as I have several other boards I post on but on this issue I had to chime in because so many here are missing the point of a very valid question that is often brought up here and ignored but deserves an honest answer. First off and I realize he has been banned and can't respond but he will likely read this anyway, Speck Tater while the discussion you were attempting to create was valid your method was silly and poorly handled. I will attempt to shed some light on what I think your true point was though.
First off, lets be clear the adult in this situation deserves to go under the jail and the teenager is a victim not a perpetrator. If you can't legally give consent then giving consent that you cannot legally should not be grounds for a separate charge.
Now for the real point that the understandably no so loved tater was trying to make. He was attempting to point out that we as a society adhere a double standard to legal responsibility of minors based on how icky we view situation. Like it or not that is a true statement. Which leads to the question the rotten tater was attempting to get at, at least I think he was. That being is this double standard one we should be comfortable with. My response to this is absolutely yes. Our entire political ideology has acceptance of double standards based on our definition of acceptable vs repugnant at its very core. It is a core tenant of social justice, and how many times have we all used the phrase that the world is not black and white but instead shades of gray. To be shades of grey means that you are accepting of double standards to a certain degreed so long as they fall upon the right side of where the gray happens to be in that situation. You can't have a gray world without double standards. The key is for those double standards to make sense and be based on what is in the best interest of everyone. There is no reason we should be afraid to voice this position. Although being prepared to intelligently defend it might be a good idea.
For those who are not buying this, let me change the scenario a little bit to create a hypothetical. Instead of the girl who was victim being the one who called the pedo. What if a "date" was setup by a "friend" of the girl who had an axe to grind and knew what was likely to happen, but the "friend" was also only 14. Would that friend be accountable as an accomplice? I dare say most here would agree he/she would be regardless of age. Why, because in that situation the friend's actions are on the wrong side of the icky scale regardless of the individual's age, and rightfully so as we should all find that situation unacceptable behavior warranting action.
So yes there is a double standard about when we treat teenagers as adults in legal matters and when we do not. We should be entirely comfortable with that, so long as the basis remains what is right.
As for the rotten tater, I am not sure you should have been banned for the point you were trying to make but your method was so poorly handled that banning you for your own good was likely a good call.