Is it just as wrong for a woman to have sex with a underage boy as it is with a man and a girl?

[ccharles000]

Poll question: Is it just as wrong for a woman to have sex with a underage boy as it is with a man and a girl?

I asked this because I have seen not only on the internet but in tv and in my family that some men seem to think it is "cool" for an underage(younger than 18)boy to have a sex with an older woman.I have had many arguments with males in my family who think this way and I don't understand it. So I say yes it is just as wrong for either gender to have sex with someone who is underage.

[WillParkinson]

1. Anyone who says it is not wrong...

Is just propagating a double standard.

[jeff30997]

4. I totally agree.

[ccharles000]

15. yup

[Toasterlad]

99. Like It Or Not, There IS a Double Standard.

[MrModerate]

2. People of whatever gender are ready to have healthy sexual contacts . . .

At different ages. For many people, that time is well before they're 18.

Also men and women are different, and society's imprinting of values and response to becoming sexually active quite different (see virginity, cult of).

On average, I think that it's less likely to be damaging to an underage boy to have a sexual relationship with an older woman than the reverse. Call me a trog, but I still stand by it.

Also, underage boys don't get pregnant.

[jeff30997]

3. "underage boys don't get pregnant"

It's also true of a 9 year old girl.

[monmouth]

7. They get "bragging rights.".....n/t

[jeff30997]

14. I knew a girl in highschool...

Who add sex with one of her teacher that was good looking.Well believe me she bragged a lot and her friends wee green with envy.

[MrModerate]

8. Who no reasonable person would think could consent to a sexual act . .

but a 17-year-old?

[RC]

18. Not true. It has been documented that 6 year olds have gotten pregnant.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

49. Usually.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_youngest_birth_mothers

[ccharles000]

52. I never knew that a 5 year old could give birth.

What kind of monster would rape a 5 year old.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

59. A monster.

You can't phrase it any better.

[jeff30997]

71. You are absolutely correct.Usually.

And the worst part is that now I remember reading about that 5 year old mother but more

recently I've read about the 9 year old girl from Rwanda mentioned in the list at the wiki

site.They say that it happened in December 2005.9 and 5 year old!

[ccharles000]

5. I would have to disagree with you...

I believe that children can not consent so I would think that a child who's mind has not developed is hurt when an adult has sex with them.

[MrModerate]

10. Complete agreement. My issue is when that development takes place . . . n/t

[cali]

11. when my son was 16 he had a relationship

with a girl who was almost 5 years older than he was. No, it didn't bother me. I just wanted for him to practice safe sex. And no, it didn't scar him or hurt him.

[Dappleganger]

75. Really?

I'd be pissed. I have a 17 yr. old daughter and 16 yr. old son (next week) and would be very upset if they'd had a sexual encounter with someone that much older at their age.

[izquierdista]

16. Then what is an adult?

Is it the age of puberty when obvious changes to the body occur or is it when chronological age has reached that of the relevant statute? Children may not know of what they are asked to consent to, but teens far younger than the statutory age know exactly what is being asked and may actively seek it out.

[ccharles000]

21. I think an adult is someone who is at least 18

[hfojvt]

61. which is clearly arbitrary

thus a person 17 years and 364 days cannot 'consent' whereas one day later they can. Or 17 years and 51 weeks and one week later. What a difference a week makes. Granted, there is a lot that a 17 year old does not know about the ways of the world, but the same could be said of most 20 year olds.

Also, as I said before, the law in most states goes by 16, not 18. And in Germany, Brazil and Canada (among others) it is 14 for the age of consent.

[fasttense]

6. Unless of course that woman is his mother.

Than it will leave huge emotional scars for life. Now if a boy has a bad relationship with his mother and he sees an older woman as that mother substitute then again underage sex will have long lasting emotional scars. Do you want to be the one to decide which little boy is all right to screw?

How soon can older women play around with little boys? At 6 year old? How about 4? Or maybe you're just thinking about the cute 10 year olds? Again so you want to be the judge?

[MrModerate]

12. While I have no personal experience, I suspect that incest generally . . .

wrecks healthy family relationships.

On your other point, society of necessity sets age limits for consent. The earliest I've heard of is 13 and the latest 18 (I'm sure there are many I've never read about). Society also takes account age range, considering a relationship between a 16-year-old and a (say) 36-year-old to be inappropriate, while a relationship between two 16-year-olds, not so much.

But the OP was about the disparity in potential harm of older-younger pairings depending upon whether the younger was male or female. On that I stand by my original statement.

[uppityperson]

82. I see it the other way around. Incest is because of unhealthy family relationships

I don't see how incest could wreck "healthy family relationships".

And as far as your original statement that underage boys don't get pregnant, true. But they can cause pregnancy in women and have the responsibility of supporting a child on them.

[MrModerate]

93. "Healthy" is relative. Perhaps a better way to say it would have been . . .

"Functional." Let's posit a father whose teenage daughter has become an object of desire for him. If he doesn't act on those desires, the family relationship can probably continue functioning until he (hopefully) gets over it. Healthy? Maybe, maybe not.

Your second point supports my opinion that older-younger pairings tend to be more damaging if the woman (or girl) is the younger. While an underage boy may have a moral obligation to support a child he fathers in such a relationship, in most cases he's probably not capable of doing so. Due to his incapacity, he doesn't assume the burden and in all likelihood simply lives his life with minimal interaction with the child in question. A woman in such a situation can't just walk away from the consequences, and no matter what she decides -- abortion, adoption, or raising the child herself -- the burden on her is much greater.

Life (and biology) ain't fair.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

25. What if it's an underage boy and an older man?

Let's say, is a 17-year-old boy and a 23-year-old female teacher the same as a 17-year-old boy with a 23-year-old priest?

[TheBigotBasher]

29. I agree with the point Haruka is making here.

Much of it is down to double standards. Gay sex is always considered bad in these circumstances, whereas a boy having sex with a female teacher would get bragging rights.

The issue of abuse is one of control and who is in charge. Adults are easily able to lead a child or young adult on. For that reason, the age of consent in the UK is 16, except where teachers or adults are in a position of authority, in which case it is 21.

_____________

An old joke that went round ages ago shows the difference

A boy comes home from school one day. His mother notices that he's got a big smile on his face. She asks, "You look happy, did anything special happen at school today?"

"Yes mum - I had sex with my English teacher!" he replied. The mother is stunned.

"Get up them stairs now and wait until your father gets home!" The dad comes home and hears the news; he's as pleased as punch. Beaming with pride, he walks over to his son and says,

"I hear you had sex with your English teacher."

"That's right, Dad."

"Well, you became a man today - this is a cause for celebration. Let's get fish and chips, then I'll buy you that bike you've been asking for."

"Mint! - but can I have a football instead? My arse is killing me."

[MrModerate]

101. A tougher call . . .

For one thing you've got the "authority" issue in the mix, which typically means a higher likelihood of an abusive or coerced relationship. Also, despite increasing acceptance of homosexual relationships over the last few decades, they are still considered "less legitimate" than heterosexual relationships, and could put more pressure on the younger person.

As a practical matter I'm not entirely sure you can complete your education and other requirements and make it to the priesthood by 23, but maybe in exceptional cases.

On balance I'd think a 17-year-old in the relationship with a priest would be more at risk because 1) he would be less likely to win the approbation of his peers (the "heh-heh" factor) and hence miss out on one form of support for his actions; 2) be more likely to be regarded as a victim; and 3) be in an unhealthy relationship, in that priests are supposed to be entirely celibate (by "priest" I'm assuming "Catholic priest"), which is not true of secular teachers.

Neither case sounds like a good idea, however.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

102. So both are bad, but the gay scenario is worse...

Okay. That's what I thought you'd say.

[MrModerate]

103. Basically, yeah, given that heterosexual relationships and homosexual relationships . . .

Are still not treated equally by society.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

105. Yeah, that doesn't really make any sense at all

Either something is right or wrong.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

56. Underage boys can become fathers, though...

And as far as being more or less damaging, it depends on the individual.

There's a huge difference between being physically ready and emotionally ready. I realize my generalization oversimplifies things; but on average, people are not emotionally ready before they are physically ready.

Better to buy them toys than encourage involvement in a sexual relationship.

[JI7]

97. so what if the older man uses a condom ? would that make it more ok ?

[cali]

9. I don't think that it's necessarily wrong for either gender

to have sex with someone who is underage. A 17 year old boy and a 20 year old girl? Not necessarily wrong. Same thing goes if you reverse the gender assignation. In general though, I think adults who prey on young people for sex, should be prosecuted no matter what their gender and no matter the gender of their victims.

[jeff30997]

13. I couldn't agree more.

:thumbsup:

[mwooldri]

20. The law says "no, it's not right".

But you have a valid point when it comes to the age of the people in question. 17 and 20... in my eyes not morally wrong (but then UK's age of consent for sex is 16, not 18). 13 and 30? Eurgh. Even if you have two underage people involved do you tarnish them with an entry on the sex offenders registry?

Mark.

[ccharles000]

22. You make a good point

[rucky]

17. Technically it's just as bad...

but they're not treated the same by society, so it doesn't seem as bad. The level of wrongness depends on how hot the woman is. I think the same goes with males to some extent - whether it's the coach or a someone else makes a difference from some reason (at least around here where there seems to be a coach/student scandal every other week).

[Heidi]

19. There also is the perception that the party being penetrated

is less powerful or threatening, even if it's an adult woman, and that there is some sort of power or greater ability to consent conferred to the one doing the penetrating, underage or not.

[TheBigotBasher]

30. It is the issue of power not penetration.

A man having sex with a young female student would be roundly condemned, as would a gay man having sex with a young male student - no matter the position. A boy having sex with a female teacher would almost always be congratulate because of the reversal of power given. It is for that reason Amy Gerhing was acquitted.

[Heidi]

42. You don't think there's a perception of penetration = power???? Honestly?

I'm not saying it's an accurate perception, but it does exist.

[TheWraith]

23. Yes, it is... which is not to say that it's always wrong.

There's a lot of complexities involved when you're talking about personal relationships and maturity levels. It can range from serious exploitation to perfectly normal relating, with a lot of grey area in between.

[ConcernedCanuk]

24. I voted no for more than one reason

.
.
.

First of all, up here - 16 is the age of consent.

different provinces, different countries have varied scales of what is defined to be an "adult".

I was surprised when I went to California in 1979 that the age of consent was 21 - same for drinking.

So I sinned according to the "law"

I think that males are less traumatized by an early sexual relationship because we males seem to be less emotionally attached to the sex act -

I thought different when I was Charles age, but I'm almost 60 now

I would have agreed with Charles back then, not now - - -

Sometimes you just have to live to learn

[Chemical Bill]

26. I learned in a workshop...

that if the sex is not physically painful then the biggest psychological problems come from the child learning of society's judgment of the act. I was molested as a boy and never thought much of it because I tended to believe the non-judgmental people around me rather than the ones who screamed about how bad it was. It was much worse for me personally to have a violent father, and there wasn't as much of a societal discouragement of that at the time.

Anyway, I think society's dividing line of age 18 is arbitrary and capricious.

Bill

[cali]

47. I'm glad for you that you don't consider yourself

terribly damaged from the sexual abuse you suffered, but for the vast majority of kids, sexual abuse is deeply scarring.

[Chemical Bill]

72. Well...

the point I was trying to make is that damage is done by telling these kids that what happened is shameful. Now I'm not trying to minimize what happens when a father molests his child, but a woman I know who was molested by her father told me that she recognizes how a part of what she felt was happy about "daddy's special attention" (her words). Certainly that's not all she felt, but it was there, and learning that society was so judgmental of her situation was not a help to her. So my point is not that it's ok for adults to prey on children, it's that expressing this kind of negative opinion without any personal involvement on our parts can actually be part of the problem. Let me put it another way: are children who "experienced sexual experimentation" at a young age different from children who "suffered sexual abuse"? I learned in the workshop I took that how we tell children to perceive what has happened has an effect on the damage to their psyche. I was never told that I "suffered sexual abuse". The vast majority of people I know who "experienced sexual experimentation" at a young age are not deeply scarred. And seriously, children are sexual beings from the word go.

Bill

[mmonk]

27. Absolutely.

I'm male but one cannot hold a double standard for that is hypocrisy and contains sexist elements in its thinking.

[ccharles000]

28. I agree

[bobbert]

31. I voted no

There is a reason for the double-standard, men and women typically treat sex differently, especially at that young of an age. Now there's a lot of women in their 20's and 30's who have become more emotionally detached from sex, but it's not common. The chemicals the male and female body release during the act of sex are very differnt, causing much more emotional attachment from a girl than from a boy. Generally, young girls are much more easily traumatized and would have a much harder time getting away from the man if it was a bad situation because of the inherent physiology. It won't be true that every boy would be ok and every girl would be hurt because each person is different, I'm just saying that because of physiological differences, the chances of it being destructive to a girl is much greater.

[Berry Cool]

32. Boy, some people can use a lot of pseudoscientific crapola to dress up their double standards,

can't they?

If underage sex is more traumatic to a girl with an older male than to a boy with an older woman, it's because the double standards of our SOCIETY make it so in the first place. Our society tells us she is to be worried about while he is to be slapped on the back and called a "man."

It's sexist. Period.

[bobbert]

34. no, it's based on chemical release due to evolution

males want to spread their seed and women want to be caring and nurturing. Don't tell me just because technology has advanced so much that evolution has too. The argument asked if it was just as wrong, I don't think it is just as wrong. However, I do feel that the punishment should be the same in both situations so that there is no double-standard. Maybe I should have clarified that earlier. I don't feel that the problem is as bad going one way as it is with the other way, but legally, both should be handled the same way. Humans CAN control how society treats people, but we CAN'T control (yet) our hormones, and I agree that the law should not have a double standard.

[Brooklyns_Finest]

55. It is

You have to accept the fact that we are different. Most women my age (30), make sex in to a bigger deal than it is. I can only imagine what goes through some teeny boppers head. Even in the case of these female teachers who have sex with their underage student, it seems as if the teachers really love these young guys. I mean, it is hardly ever just about sex with these women. With the dudes, it is all about busting as many nuts as possible and then back to their X-Box.

[treestar]

77. exactly, and it is always the women who lose in the double standard

WE gets our hearts broken more easily. WE take it all more seriously.

The whole point of that crap is to try to convince us that we are the objects and the men have the power.

[seabeyond]

80. yes... and it is all so dishonest and in our face dishonest, yet

we are suppose to buy it. MOST people of both gender want a connection. not one gender over the other. individuals, of both gender, in minority may not need or want connection, but people as a whole look for it, crave it. i dont need a connection nearly as much as most, and lordy, if i am not female. yet my husband and brother desperately want that connection to female. they will never go without a mate.

i listen to men on this board go on about someone to love them. i real life it is equally evident everywhere around us.

yet we pretend, and it is only a stupid pretend game, that male dont need or want, it is all the female. a blatant lie to self SOME males like to keep propagating for exactly the reason you state.

[bobbert]

83. funny, my physiology prof was a woman

she's the one who explained to us the differences in chemicals released during sex. It is in any physiology textbook. I also stated in my post that there are exceptions to the norm, as there are in any case. There are women who find sex unemotional just as there are men who want to be caring and nurturing. However, once you add sex into the picture, the men are getting more testosterone and the women more oxytocin... You point out a few exceptions to the rule, yet you are not looking at the big picture. There is a reason I would never have sex with a virgin woman again, they do not know how to handle the new chemicals, they become so attached and needy it's annoying. A teenage boy could become attached and needy due to psychological issues, but when you add the chemical physiology to it, you can see that young girls can be in much more emotional danger.

[seabeyond]

86. what a bunch of crap

i have been watching for four decades your males wanting to connect with a female, young and old, vast majority. it is a game we are all playing, and it is crap. the majority, of both genders want a connection to another human. well documented.

i think it is your post that refuses to see the big picture.

[treestar]

76. Must be nice to be a male and have all that power of not caring

No, it's social mores of patriarchy that determine that we poor women take it all so much more seriously, giving men that power over us.

With birth control, crap, we can treat it as a game just like men do. A lot of women seek it out and aren't traumatized.

Maybe we don't sit around crying that a man has abandoned us. I know that many men will panic at that thought, they need to believe that hold the upper hand in every relationship with a female.

[seabeyond]

81. tit for tat. hubby and i just

had conversation about me being a tit for tat kinda gal. balances the field

so tired of this shit

and the evolutionary psycho babble is working overtime to reinstall this shit that was going along the wayside a couple decades ago

[bobbert]

87. There's a reason men want to go to sleep after sex and women want to 'cuddle'

And it's not because men a chauvanistic assholes that we want to just go to sleep.

[seabeyond]

88. another stupid that hubby and i laugh about. lets pin something else on the genders

make one come off uncaring and unneedy, and one needy.

hubby the spooner, i am the claustrophobic and both of us energized after sex.

how about if i dont buy into the bullshit continually fed to us.

[bobbert]

90. OK, not everyone is alike

but you are still ignoring physiological facts. I continually tell you that some people are more responsive to chemicals than others. However you still ignore the truth that these chemicals are present in all mammals, not just humans, and all of the research proving a difference. I agree that with any stimulus there is a distribution of the effect on each person, let's say it's a bell curve, and some people will be at the top, some people will be at the bottom. You stating that there is not a difference between men and women is the same as saying that people are not born gay, it's just societal impact that makes them gay. People have different balances of chemicals making some stimuli more effective to them than other people. You are ignoring that and saying everyone is the same and that only outside factors are responsible for how we behave, that there is no possible way that men & women can have a different chemical makeup, you ma'am, are ignoring science.

edit: I'm just waiting for your rebuttal where you say that the average woman could be the same size and strength as the average man. It's just not true, there are chemical differences. Yes a lot of women are stronger than a lot of men, but that's not the typical man/woman.

[seabeyond]

91. that would be why

prostitutes around the world would feel that emotional crushing blow after every john.

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our second quarter 2009 fund drive.
Donate and you'll be automatically entered into our daily contest.
New prizes daily!



No purchase or donation necessary. Void where prohibited. Click here for more information.

[omega minimo]

35. Oh Goody FLAMEBAIT

:thumbsdown:

[cali]

36. how is this flamebait? people here are having a civil discussion

about this topic- or at least we were until you came bullying your way in the conversation with the ridiculous charge that the OP is flamebait.

:thumbsdown: to your rude post.

[omega minimo]

37. Oh Goody the gatekeeper........ and sensible folk will avoid the FLAMEBAIT so it looks "civil"

:rofl: Perfect that it's you and not the OP replyng!!!!!!!!!!!!

[cali]

38. again, how exactly is this flamebait?

and plenty of sensible people are engaged in this thread. is calling President Obama a corporatist front flamebait? What constitutes flamebait? Perhaps it's a little bit like defining porn- you kmow when you see it. problem is there are many definitions. That's why the mods often consult with one another on whether a thread is or is not flamebait.

so try and have this locked as flamebait. It'll simply be yet another failure for you.

[omega minimo]

41. Have at it.

"so try and have this locked as flamebait. It'll simply be yet another failure for you."

Is that what you would do? Or just more false accusations? Too twisted.

Have at it, gatekeeper!!

[cali]

46. you aren't making sense. YOU are the one who blasted this as flamebait

and yes, of course I alert on what I'm sure is flamebait. I asked you how this constitutes flamebait. of course you couldn't answer cogently. but cogent isn't your thing. that's clear.

[omega minimo]

51. let it go cali. unless you need one more excuse to get your hooks in and drip venomous insults.

[proteus_lives]

39. I voted yes.

There are a lot of variables, (like he's 16 and she's 21) but the real problem (or lack of problem) is an unequal relationship. And in most cases the older person is the one in charge.

I person can be 17 but be emotionally 10.

[notesdev]

92. Emotional ages

I know people who are chronologically over fifty, but emotionally ... five, tops (being generous).

[Maru Kitteh]

40. Abso-FLIPPIN-lootely! And they should be charged and prosecuted equally

Some creeper, perv teacher in Lexington, NE ran off to Mexico with a 13 year old boy so she could boink him and her slimeball lawyer tried to pin the blame on the victim. She STILL hasn't taken responsibility for her actions. I hope they keep her in prison for a LONG, LONG time but they probably won't.

All perverts who sexually use children should be locked up for a long time and many, if not most of them, should be permanently separated from society, as far as I'm concerned.

[depakid]

43. Anyone not recognizing that there are gender differences here

and that the issue is not so clearly defined is deluding themselves. But then, one expects that from Americans- after all, this is the nation- and the people that brought so called "zero tolerance" to the forefront.

And argues whether torture is legitimate. Or whether it's appropriate to imprison juveniles for life without parole.

[Brooklyns_Finest]

44. Double standard

I lost my virginity, at 14, by my uncles then 22 year old girlfriend (well one of his girls). Lets just say it was his gift to me. It did not effect me in the least bit. If my 14 year old sister was having sex with a 22 yearo old guy, I would have killed him (witht he help of my uncle). It is a double standard, but life is full of double standards. My female coworkers wear the most provocative outfits, while I am stuck in a suit all the time. I don't complain, I just accept it.

[seabeyond]

48. wasnt that nice he "gifted" one of his girls to you.....

:puke:

[Brooklyns_Finest]

62. Was I supposed to say no?

I don't see the problem here. She was just fine with the situation. My uncle was a legend in his day. Anyone who has ever played high school or college ball has been hooked up like this before.

Would I do it for my own son? Probably not, but if my brother hooked my son up like this, I would only be mildly annoyed.

[ccharles000]

64. I would have said no.

If I had a 14 year old son and a family member did this I would have called the police.

[cali]

50. ugh. sexist claptrap.

really nasty sexist claptrap.

[omega minimo]

53. there's yer flame, see how that works? draws "really nasty sexist claptrap" & those who've seen this

a million times on DU STAY OUT and let you have your little "civil" bs discussion.........................

[cali]

58. bzzzt. wrong again, dear. first of all

you called the OP flamebait. an ugly response often appears in completely uncontentious seeming threads. it is not de facto proof that an OP is flamebait. you're being more than a wee bit hypoctiritcal here about staying out of this thread. you've posted in it amply. cognitive dissonance much, omega?

now let me give you some advice: for your own good, just let it go, honey.

[omega minimo]

63. Hypocritical? Like pretending ANY thread about sex, esp. with a stupid premise like that, won't get

flamed?

Maybe so. Since the level headed avoid the inevitable (by not commenting, let the bs have it's fun and since the gatekeeper is here to keep things "civil......"
:sarcasm:



Your reversals will never work, cali, until you start using your own vocabulary instead of others. :freak:

[Lorien]

69. Interesting. I have several male friends who lost their virginity

between the ages of 14-17 to much older women and they seem to look back at the experience as a positive one, but my female friends who lost their virginity in their teens to much older men often feel like they were taken advantage of. Is the difference in the way each gender views sex or is it rooted in our cultural views? If society encourages one but discourages the other does that shape the views of those involved? Right or wrong, a real double standard does appear to exist.

[seabeyond]

74. .

[Kaleva]

45. I certainly wouldn't have bitched but it's against the law

and the law should be applied equally.

[hfojvt]

54. first, "under age" is not under 18

In Kansas it is legal for me to have sex with a 16 year old girl and just as legal for a 47 year old woman to have sex with a 16 year old boy. Not that the parents in both cases would not be mad as heck.

That's not true though if the older person is a teacher. I believe it is even illegal for a 22 year old teacher to have sex with an 18 year old student.

It may seem like a double standard, but I only speak as a former 14 and 15 year old male. If I had had sex at that age, unless I was raped by a really unattractive woman, there is no way I would feel like a 'victim'. Having never been a 14 year old girl, I cannot have the same knowledge.

[Nevernose]

57. Here's a boy whose life was pretty screwed up by a pretty young teacher:

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/25329318/sex_lies_and_phys_ed

Excerpts:
After Jason graduated, he tried community college but lasted only half a semester. He spent a year succumbing to depression, living first with his mom and then out of his car, getting stoned by day, working nights as a stripper. He's been working construction, trying to get his act together, although he's saddled with the woes of a country-music song: behind in his rent, no health insurance, a car that won't run, walks with a limp from an on-the-job injury, can't afford to pay his therapist, owes his college $488 in tuition. At least he has a girlfriend. She's 34, with two kids. But he still can't let go of what happened with Tapp.

"It obviously has held me back," he says, stubbing out a Parliament in his shabby apartment beside the Hammonton railroad tracks. "Society kind of cons you into feeling like, 'You are a guy, and it's not supposed to bother you.' But it really did mess me up." Seated behind a TV-tray table, Jason is a hulking presence in a black Affliction T-shirt and a baseball cap atop his shaved head, with the huge arms and thick neck of a comic-book superhero. The kitchen cabinets behind him are empty except for a deflating Mylar balloon from his recent 21st birthday.
...
Each August, when his peers return to college, Jason falls into a funk. He feels left behind in Hammonton, where everyone knows too much about him, but he defiantly refuses to leave. He wants to be in the faces of all those school officials whom he feels betrayed him, a reminder of their failure to protect him. And so he volunteers as a football coach for nine-year-olds in Hammonton — a job he considers his greatest joy — even though it's part of the very same school district he tried to sue. Jason even finagled a date to the Hammonton prom, just to show everyone he is still here. From time to time he runs into Scibilia, who no longer works at the school. The last time Jason spotted Scibilia — who owns a pool company whose employees wear T-shirts emblazoned with the words "Wee Like It Wet" — his temper got the best of him, and he chased his former coach through the streets. The confrontation ended with Jason bellowing, "You hurt me more than she did!"

"I want to get on with my life, I really do," Jason says. "I just need...clarity." To get there, he keeps a spiral notebook with him, jotting his jumbled thoughts in verse. And he lovingly maintains a huge trophy case in his bedroom, as well as a "wall of fame" covered with plaques and medals and framed photos of himself in his sports uniforms. It's a monument, in essence, to his innocence — to the days before Jason realized, as children inevitably do, that teachers you trusted as older, wiser friends can turn out to be complex and wary rivals, whose lessons for you often involve more pain than love.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

60. It's about self control.

Young people may need to learn how to control themselves as they become sexually mature. Adults have the obligation to control themselves...they don't have youth as an excuse.

[cherish44]

65. Yes it's very wrong

Underage children, male or female, don't have the judgement necessary to make responsible choices about sex most of the time. (Granted a lot of adults don't either but you have to reach a point of being responsible for your own stupid judgement some time). Even though these relationships are often "consensual" it's illegal for reason.

[Sparkly]

66. I have the unpopular "no" view.

"No" in GENERAL -- because there are a wide range of variables.

In general though, much as we'd like all things to be equal, they aren't. There are physical differences, for one thing, and there are also cultural differences that greatly affect psychological/emotional responses.

I'm not saying it's a great idea in any case, but I think it's not a simple, equal reversal.

[Cleita]

67. Children who have reached sexual maturity are still children and any adult,

no matter the circumstances, is taking advantage of that child's vulnerability and inability to control the situation.

[madmom]

68. Look at the maturity level. It is widely believed/known that girls mature faster than boys, so

in that context it should be ok for older men to have sex with younger girls. I think is it wrong for older people of either sex the prey on younger people who are less mature & less experienced in life.

[lumberjack_jeff]

70. Equal protection: it's not just a good idea, it's the law. n/t

[Skittles]

73. absolutely yes

and you guys who think it is just gee whiz A-OK have your heads up your ignorant asses

[treestar]

78. Of course it is.

A boy is not empowered by this. He's being taken advantage of. Just like girls are.

There are those who want to believe it is "biological" the men can take advantage of women but the opposite cannot occur. That's because they want it all to be in the control of the man how the relationship goes. That extends to any relationship.

[chrisa]

79. I don't claim to know.

But the idea of a teenager sleeping with somebody older makes me gag a little. I'm sure in some instances teens are mentally mature enough, but I just think the whole thought is nasty. I would think something was wrong with a girl if she wanted somebody that young.

[Odin2005]

84. YES!!! Anyone who thinks otherwise is a sexist jerk who needs a kick in the head.

And just because the boy wants the sex doesn't mean he is allowed to consent to it, and thus it is still rape.

[uppityperson]

85. wayyyy back I was taught to only have sex with men I was ready to be tied to, since could be pg

If I had sex with someone, it would be with someone I would have to stay with if I got pregnant. So, everyone I had sex with I was emotionally involved with, sometimes inappropriately.

Wayyyy back, however, men could have sex with whomever, because they would not get pregnant. If the woman did, meh. Move on.

Then Roe v Wade was passed, birth control pills and other contraceptives became more readily available and the need to have sex only with someone you might stay with if got pregnant faded. I remember being chided "what's the matter? aren't you on the pill? aren't you liberated" by a jerk, and telling him that the reason I didn't want to have sex was simply because he was an asshole.

Times have changed, attitudes have changed, not sure if young women still feel that need to have to be highly emotionally involved. Not advocating having sex with everyone who is available, but not to have that strong strong need to be overly emotionally tied.

So, to answer the OP, yes. I think it is just as wrong no matter which sex either partner is. Having sex with underage people is having sex with people who have not had enough time, enough maturity, to be emotionally mature enough to handle the emotions that can, and often do, happen with sexual relations.

[demokatgurrl]

89. It's always wrong to take advantage of someone

weaker than you, and a child (even a teenager) is generally weaker than an adult. It's sexual harrassment, really.

[ismnotwasm]

94. Yes

Yet we have a historical precedent of bringing young men to prostitutes for their "first time" at fairly young ages. Young women were expected to remain chaste. Simply part of the larger sexual/gender dichotomies.

It's not just about age though, I think anytime you have predatory sexual behavior it's wrong. Teachers shouldn't mess with their students, psychologists shouldn't mess with their patients. Older men and women should leave our sexually and emotionally immature and/or vulnerable kids alone.

[omega minimo]

95. it's a male fantasy, perpetuated in movies and other media. "just as wrong" is the question?

[dustbunnie]

96. Yes, it's just as wrong. And it's also different, with less stress on the boy -

in such a relationship as a girl. Especially in cases where culture allows for young girls to be with older, emotionally immature men.

When young girls start abusing farm animals, I guess it'll be equal. As someone else said, the penetrator/penetratee thing is what it's all about.

Edited to change except to especially. Lol.

[book_worm]

98. 19% of Duers are nuts.

[Toasterlad]

100. Of Course Not.

While every circumstance is different, the fact is that society demands different things sexually from men and women. Despite the increasing (and generally admirable) desire to make everything 50-50 as far as rights and responsibilities among the genders go, young men and young women do NOT (and never will) view sex the same way. Women are bombarded every day with both subliminal and overt messages telling them that if they are sexually active, they're immoral; that sex is not something to be enjoyed for it's own sake, but only as a by-product of a "loving relationship", in which the fulfillment comes largely from having "pleased one's man". A great deal of the outrage which follows a teenage girl/older man sexual scenario is driven by ancient ideals of women as property, which must remain pure until the "owner takes possession". What sucks for women is that they're constantly told they should be equal to men, yet told at the same time that there are standards they must obey and rules they must follow, PARTICULARLY sexually, if they wish to be "desirable" to men; as either wife material or mistress material - a different standard for each. Women who enjoy sex too much are "loose" and not "marriage material", while women who are "lady-like" and "wholesome" are less sexy but more "moral" - and more likely to make a good wife.

Boys, on the other hand, are encouraged to get as much sexual experience as they can, and are derided (by both men and women) if they don't. Very little in the way of moral judgment is assigned to a male teenager with a lengthy sexual history; he is congratulated and admired at nearly every turn, whereas a boy who has little luck with sex is mocked and/or pitied. Boys are not expected to attach an emotional response to sex, which is another way women are subjugated: sex for men is a primal instinct, whereas women are instructed to view sex as a purely romantic exercise, which they needn't particularly enjoy (the idea that women CAN enjoy sex is a relatively new concept, and still brutally squashed in some parts of the world).

The fact is, every individual is different, and everyone reaches sexual maturity (physically and emotionally) at a different time. We can toss out arbitrary ages like 18, 16, however we wish, but there are 40 year old men who are emotionally ill-equipped to handle sex, while there are 14 year old girls who can handle the reality just fine...and vice versa. However, it isn't the individual circumstances that drive society's condemnation of older male/younger female sex, nor is it really a question of age. It is centuries old prejudices about gender roles that inform most of the reaction.

If sex weren't such a ridiculous taboo in this country, both young men AND young women would be infinitely better off.

[mntleo2]

104. Sex with underage kids is betrayal ...

...what is it with men who think men are "lucky" if an adult woman has sex with an underage boy?

I do think that it depends on the age of the child and the woman, meaning if a 15 year old and 18 year old fall in love, well this might be pushing things, though the boy is most likely much less mature than even his female peers of the same age. But when a woman much older than 18, has sex with a boy much younger than 15, there is a whole hell of a lot of maturity that boys need to go through before they know who they are as a man and are ready for a relationship with anyone. Especially since boys mature at a later age than girls.


When oh when are we going to promote the legitimacy of masturbation and tell kids they are hurting no one and cannot make anyone pregnant if they practice it? And if they are sexually active with a peer, when are we going to openly and hoestly promote birth control?

I have Danish friends who told me that they were educated and encouraged to use birth control when they were quite young. As older teens, when they had a partner, it was OK to spend the night together and nobody thought anything about it. They have a lower birth rate than here and teen pregnancy is almost unheard of.

Sex is important to teens and it is important to educate them as to the alternatives they have to prevent pregnancy and the emotional attachment a sexual relationship can cause. But sex with adults is wrong, no matter which way it goes. It is the adult taking advantage of the child, and a betrayal to a child when it is an adult's role to show restraint and responsibility because these kids are still kids and vulnerable.

My 2 cents

Cat In Seattle