General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Marriage tips from a rapist, on ABC [View all]BainsBane
(53,032 posts)and there is nothing consensual about assault on children. The "hands of the law" are there to protect children from sexual predators who believe children exist for their own sexual satisfaction. Child rape is a very big deal. It destroys lives, and minimizing only contributes to its perpetuation. You are claiming a violent crime is no big deal, despite the fact the boy did not consent because children cannot consent to sex. When people find children sexually alluring, they have serious psychological problems and when they act on it they become criminals. Children do not exist for disturbed adults to violate at will. That you can't tell the difference between sex and rape is disturbing.
Rape is a violent crime, and defending it is condoning violence and abuse of children. It is such attitudes that allow rapists to act with virtual impunity. Naturally you see that as no problem because it's just "sex" and the fact there was no consent is entirely irrelevant to the adult's sexual gratification, which is clearly all that matters to some.
There is considerable evidence that rape leaves traumatizes children, boys every bit as much as girls.
That trauma clearly is irrelevant to you, since you think rape no different from golf. I see some really ugly justification for violent, predatory behavior on the most vulnerable segments of the population. Pedophilia is not only illegal, it is violent, destructive, and about the worst kind of acts human beings are capable of. I have no patience for these efforts to normalize adults preying on children. Everything about it is reprehensible. Such attitudes are unfortunately all to prevalent, as evidence in the judge's ruling waiving mandatory sentencing for the rapist of a three year old, whom, the judge insisted "didn't intend to harm the child." It's just "sex," after all.