They put a fucking 17 YEAR OLD in JAIL for this?!

monster · 01-09-2007, 08:32 PM

Why is it always the case that the issues where it so easy to draw a physical line between "good' and "bad" are those where they grey areas are most needed, and those where a clear definition is needed are those where the dividing line is a grey smudge at best? It's so easy to say "the sex you had was wrong because s/he was only 15", and yet so hard to rule that "the sex you had was wrong because you didn't realize she really meant it when she said no because last time she din't report it".

piercehawkeye45 · 01-09-2007, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by monster

Why is it always the case that the issues where it so easy to draw a physical line between "good' and "bad" are those where they grey areas are most needed, and those where a clear definition is needed are those where the dividing line is a grey smudge at best?

Too much work is my guess. It is much easier just to draw a line on hard issues then trying to work it out.

xoxoxoBruce · 01-10-2007, 07:34 PM

Quote:

It's so easy to say "the sex you had was wrong because s/he was only 15", and yet so hard to rule that "the sex you had was wrong because you didn't realize she really meant it when she said no because last time she din't report it".

Where did that come from? Did anyone suggest non-consentual was ok?

monster · 01-10-2007, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Where did that come from? Did anyone suggest non-consentual was ok?

No, sorry if I implied that -which I probably did- I was trying to allude the the (adult) cases where alleged rapists are found not guilty because at one point in the past, she said no but didn't cry rape afterwards...... There was a spate of such cases reported a year or so back along the lines of "she set a precedent for no not meaning no", so these cases were hard to convict, whereas in underage consensual sex, it's easy to convict even if no-one cries rape, simply because a minimum age is so easy to define and enforce.

That's probably not any clearer. perhaps I should look into a career in politics?

xoxoxoBruce · 01-10-2007, 09:18 PM

Much clearer, thanks. I went back and read the entire thread trying to find a reference.

monster · 01-10-2007, 11:15 PM

sorry

xoxoxoBruce · 01-11-2007, 10:53 PM

No problem, I knew you had a good point, I was just wondering what triggered it.

01-09-2007, 08:32 PM	#1
monster I hear them call the tide Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Perpetual Chaos Posts: 30,852	Why is it always the case that the issues where it so easy to draw a physical line between "good' and "bad" are those where they grey areas are most needed, and those where a clear definition is needed are those where the dividing line is a grey smudge at best? It's so easy to say "the sex you had was wrong because s/he was only 15", and yet so hard to rule that "the sex you had was wrong because you didn't realize she really meant it when she said no because last time she din't report it". __________________ The most difficult thing is the decision to act, the rest is merely tenacity Amelia Earhart

01-10-2007, 09:18 PM	#5
xoxoxoBruce The future is unwritten Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 71,105	Much clearer, thanks. I went back and read the entire thread trying to find a reference. __________________ The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.

01-10-2007, 11:15 PM	#6
monster I hear them call the tide Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Perpetual Chaos Posts: 30,852	sorry __________________ The most difficult thing is the decision to act, the rest is merely tenacity Amelia Earhart

01-11-2007, 10:53 PM	#7
xoxoxoBruce The future is unwritten Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 71,105	No problem, I knew you had a good point, I was just wondering what triggered it. __________________ The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)