Laura(southernxyl): Word.Steve2 is forgetting the plot of “Fatal Attraction”, methinks. Casual sex isn’t only problematic for the person who has a pre-existing mental condition. It can be for the person who hooks up with a person who has a pre-existing mental condition. As I’ve said before, a woman who can have sex with grown men without risking prison, would risk prison to have sex with a teenager only b/c he can do something for her that the grown man can’t — not something physical, obviously, but something emotional. And she must need this emotional whatever-it-is pretty bad to risk everything — profession, family, liberty — for it. The kid thinks he’s getting a roll in the hay, the woman is working out her pathology on him. But per Steve2, it’s all good.

You’re forgetting that the younger guy may have better physical sexual performance in some areas (e.g., ability to perform multiple times).

Nick

And a sizable number of male posters are telling you that you are wrong with respect to teenage boys. I assume that you are female from your handle; maybe you should listen to the voice of experience.

As a male poster I still side with Suzy, with the ability to separate fantasy from reality. While the original post was about 17 year-olds, many of the assertions were regarding 15 year-olds. I’d say there’s very little “voice of experience” being expressed regarding actual encounters between 30 yr old women and 15 year old boys from the male perspective. There’s a bunch of hollywood theorizing and fantasy. Reality is much, much different.

LoboSolo:
But then the predatory female says to herself, “Aw, who cares. If I get pregnant, I can abort, give the child up for adoption, drop it off at the fire station, or make him pay me. Poor guy will never know what hit him.”

Who is this ‘predatory female’ and why the heck does she seem to think that abortion isn’t an expensive, painful, and stressful procedure, like most women do?

LoboSolo:
Scenario:
Man pulls out a condom.
Woman, “What are you going to do with that?”
Man, “Put it on!”
W, “What? You think I’m some skanky ho with a disease? Is that what you think of me?”

As we discussed before, it can be problematic to have sex with people who are suffering from mental illness, like the bipolar woman in your example. :)

Yes it is a tragedy since women can control their fertility and should know when they ovulating.

...

1. Condoms are not a reliable form of birth control.

LMAO.

You seriously think we know when we are ovulating? Maybe for the small subset of women whose periods arrive like clockwork every month — and even for them, ovulation can happen at odd times. For the rest of us, we have no freakin clue. Anybody who has told you that women have a “reponsibility” for knowing when we ovulate is full of crap. It’s one more made-up off-the-wall excuse for you to put the responsibility for your welfare off onto another person. From Mommy to girlfriend, you never had to step up to the plate.

Also, per your imaginary conversation: why in the world would you let yourself be bullied by a woman who doesn’t want you to protect yourself? Are you really incapable of saying no to sex with such a person? Really? I find that horrifying, if true.

PS:

1. Condoms are not a reliable form of birth control.

2. Scenario:

Man pulls out a condom.

Woman, “What are you going to do with that?”

Man, “Put it on!”

W, “What? You think I’m some skanky ho with a disease? Is that what you think of me?”

M, “No, no ... I just want to make sure you don’t get pregnant.”

W, “Oh, so you think I’m stupid now. You think I’m stupid enough to have sex while I’m ovulating. You think I’m a stupid, skanky, ho who doesn’t use birth control. You know I’m on the Pill I told you that at dinner!”

M, “I just being safe.”

W, “Have you been messing around with other women? Is that it? You think you might have some disease from some ho?”

M, “No, really. I ...”

W, “I take precautions. I hate condoms. If you don’t trust me, then just go leave.”

Only she is lying ...

PS:

1. Condoms are not a reliable form of birth control.

2. Scenario:

Man pulls out a condom.

Woman, “What are you going to do with that?”

Man, “Put it on!”

W, “What? You think I’m some skanky ho with a disease? Is that what you think of me?”

M, “No, no ... I just want to make sure you don’t get pregnant.”

W, “Oh, so you think I’m stupid now. You think I’m stupid enough to have sex while I’m ovulating. You think I’m a stupid, skanky, ho who doesn’t use birth control. You know I’m on the Pill I told you that at dinner!”

M, “I just being safe.”

W, “Have you been messing around with other women? Is that it? You think you might have some disease from some ho?”

M, “No, really. I ...”

W, “I take precautions. I hate condoms. If you don’t trust me, then just go leave.”

Only she is lying ...

Laura(southernxyl): Lobo

Yes it is a tragedy since women can control their fertility and should know when they ovulating. If women could only could refrain from inappropriate sexual activity when it is available to them. If only someone would invent a Pill or an IUD. If only a woman could look at a man and formulate a thought like “I’d like some of that, but what if I should get pregnant?” ... But then the predatory female says to herself, “Aw, who cares. If I get pregnant, I can abort, give the child up for adoption, drop it off at the fire station, or make him pay me. Poor guy will never know what hit him.”

If a woman can drop a newborn off at a fire station and walk away with not parental responsibilities, why can’t the man?

It used to be that it was the father’s choice whether to acknowledge an out-of-wedlock child ... Now he has no choice what so ever after conception. If she wants to abort and he doesn’t ... too bad; if he wants to put the child up for adoption and she doesn’t ... too bad. If she wants to drop off the child at a fire station within the first 72 hours and walk away with no parental responsibilities ... she can do so ... he cannot.

This is all sincerely a tragedy, since women control sex and men have no control whatsoever about where their seed goes. If only men could refrain from inappropriate sexual activity when it is available to them. If only someone would invent a condom, or something. If only a man could look at a woman and formulate a thought like “I’d like some of that, but what if she should get pregnant?” Alas.

Joe: Joe

Joe, you must be my alter ego today. I agree!

Furthermore, I was under 18 and having sex with older women and I don’t consider myself emotionally damaged ... just darn lucky! And I have no regrets.

TN is like Joe’s state ... the age of consent is a moving target which defies all logic and common sense. Let’s pick an age and stick to it.

Answer me this: Why is that an adult woman can have sex with an underage male, be guilty of statutory rape, but if she gets pregnant, he is still on the hook for child support? How can the victim of a crime be liable to the perp? ... Yea, yea ... It’s “for the child” and “the child is innocent”. BS ...

It used to be that it was the father’s choice whether to acknowledge an out-of-wedlock child ... Now he has no choice what so ever after conception. If she wants to abort and he doesn’t ... too bad; if he wants to put the child up for adoption and she doesn’t ... too bad. If she wants to drop off the child at a fire station within the first 72 hours and walk away with no parental responsibilities ... she can do so ... he cannot.

When was it that women who had made it to puberty had a lifespan of 35? (And so forth.) Most of those numbers are means, with a lot of zeros and ones thrown in.

Of course transmission rates can be different.

I did a lot of things when I was a teenager I wouldn’t do now, probably wouldn’t enjoy now, some of which the fond memory is mixed with regret, sometimes it’s all regret. (And don’t forget, the reason the little sparrow regreted nothing was car ma vie, car mes joies, aujourd’hui ça commence avec toi — if you get out of it alive and end up in a good place, it’s all good.) I’m sure there was sex I didn’t have that if I’d had it that’s how I’d feel about, given that’s how I feel about most of the sex I did have.

IMNSHO the most important thing is equal expectations. Two people who believe in casual sex and who believe they are having casual sex can have casual sex with much more benefit and much less harm than if there are differing expectations.

We weren’t in love oh no far from it
We weren’t searching for some pie in the sky summit
We were just young and restless and bored
Living by the sword
And we’d steal away every chance we could
To the backroom, the alley, the trusty woods
I used her she used me
But neither one cared
We were getting our share
...
Ain’t it funny how the night moves
When you just don’t seem to have as much to lose

Of course it’s very different if there is actual coercion, or a significant power/authority difference.

Anatid: Also: Since when do 15-year-old girls not fantasize about their young, attractive male teachers?

Word.

Steve2 is forgetting the plot of “Fatal Attraction”, methinks. Casual sex isn’t only problematic for the person who has a pre-existing mental condition. It can be for the person who hooks up with a person who has a pre-existing mental condition. As I’ve said before, a woman who can have sex with grown men without risking prison, would risk prison to have sex with a teenager only b/c he can do something for her that the grown man can’t — not something physical, obviously, but something emotional. And she must need this emotional whatever-it-is pretty bad to risk everything — profession, family, liberty — for it. The kid thinks he’s getting a roll in the hay, the woman is working out her pathology on him. But per Steve2, it’s all good.

You are assuming your conclusion. Essentially, you take the position that teenage sex with an older woman is by definition non-consensual and coerced. No one here thinks nonconsensual sex is good. Your evidence is the feelings of two people outside the age range we have been discussing. No one here advocates that 12-year-olds should have sex (we are talking about teenagers, not 12-year-olds). Thirteen is a teenager, but barely. I will grant your point with respect to those ages.

The original post, however, was about a 17-year-old. The major discussion here has been about 15-to-17-year-olds. However one may draw the line, there is a difference. The question is whether those older teen boys are more likely than girls of similar age to be traumatized by engaging in consensual sex with an older person of the opposite sex.

I don’t understand why you describe the posts of people who disagree with you as “the personal testimony of this group of self-selected blog commenters with shared interests.” Posting a comment on a blog is by definition, “self-selection.” What “shared interests” are you talking about? Being male and formerly 17? (Way formerly for many of us. I doubt that we have many 17-year-old commenters on this site looking for sex with older women.) Being male and formerly 17, by the way, means that we probably have had more interaction with the group under discussion than you have, because boys and girls tend to self-segregate during the teenage years. Being married and 58 years old, I’m not looking for a relationship with an older woman, but, if I were, it would be perfectly legal to do so. So clearly that “interest” is irrelevant to any discussion of trauma to a 17-year-old.

What “interest” am I furthering by stating that in my experience, most boys at 17 would jump at the chance to have sex with some older women and be none the worse for the experience? None, as far as I can tell.

Porkchop: Yes, I’m female, but that doesn’t prevent me from having better evidence for my claims than is found in the personal testimony of this group of self-selected blog commenters with shared interests. It’s simply true that teenaged boys are sometimes sexually assaulted, and it can be very hard for them to seek assistance in a world that understands why a girl can be assaulted, but thinks that boys must have been consenting just because they were physiologically capable. Or that the boys actually want this because, after all, what boy wouldn’t? Or that they are simply less emotionally traumatized by it because they’re boys.

All of this is a terrible disservice to boys. Of course they’re usually just as interested in sex as you and others have been saying; but it’s a very different thing when the experience is on someone else’s terms and you’re uncomfortable about whether you should be agreeing to it. Of the men in my life I know well enough to have this personal information, two waited until they were in their twenties to have sex for the first time (one until marriage), and both are very glad it worked out this way, though sure, it wasn’t always easy to wait. Two others had sex for the first time when they were 12 and 13, respectively, and both of them regret it and wish it had never happened at that age. With the 13 year old the girl was an older highschool girl, and he definitely felt ashamed and taken advantage of. But that’s not something he could tell to anyone until he was an adult. That’s unfortunate. I think if we care about our young boys in this society as much as the girls, we have to respect that they do deserve this consideration, and not just assume they’re fitting the stereotype taken for granted.

Martha:
Hey, don’t diss the romance novels! :)

Hey, I’m for porn and romance novels alike! :)

Steve2:
Sorry, I’ll correct myself: The only way sex can be emotionally traumatizing to any participant, male or female, is if it’s non-consensual or they have a pre-existing mental health condition.

I still don’t believe that every single case can fall under one of those two umbrellas. Why is it so important to speak in extremes, anyway? What is the point you’re trying to make here, rather than allowing for a wide range of human variation?

Steve2:
Only one human society I know of has ever had the right approach to sex, and that society was fictional: Brave New World.It had a lot of unrelated flaws, but it had the encouragement of promiscuity right.

Does this mean we have to include the overwhelming stigma that Brave New World placed on folks who wanted to be monogamous?

Anatid: Oh, come on. There are plenty of ways that the highly complicated human mind can have issues with sex short of all-out rape, that have nothing to do with statutory consent. Be realistic.

Sorry, I’ll correct myself: The only way sex can be emotionally traumatizing to any participant, male or female, is if it’s non-consensual or they have a pre-existing mental health condition.

Only one human society I know of has ever had the right approach to sex, and that society was fictional: Brave New World. It had a lot of unrelated flaws, but it had the encouragement of promiscuity right.

I find romance novels to be as sexist and degrading to men as porn is arguably to women, but hey. And if you extend the inference to chick flicks, pardon me, romantic comedies ...

Hey, don’t diss the romance novels! :) Nowadays, at least, they’re not degrading to men or women; they’re more like mainstream chick flicks than the heaving bosoms rape fantasy stereotype. Depending on the author, they can get quite steamy, though, so you’re probably right that they can help appease female urges. I’m more of an SF fan myself, but I have been known to read the occasional Jennifer Crusie or Kay Hooper (and it seems you haven’t).

Suzy:
Right, and I’m saying that when a teenager has sex with an adult, he or she can experience trauma, shame, and regret. Not all teenagers will experience this, of course. But some will, because they are not yet capable of exercising their judgment in the matter, just like they aren’t ready to take responsibility for driving a car or consenting to chemotherapy. We try to pick an age when we think most of them are, or are not, to help draw these lines.Males and females have all sorts of differences, but the differences for which we have actual evidence aren’t relevant to judging who would experience what degree of emotional trauma. The very fact that there are such strong cultural stereotypes about this is telling. First, it would make it very hard to get good data about people’s reactions. Are boys even likely to report such a thing or seek help dealing with the fallout? I mean, look at all the people who would be laughing them out of the room, on the assumption that every young boy dreams of this experience? And they may be extremely ashamed of their own feelings about what has happened, as a result. The bottom line is that it’s not the sort of thing you could weigh in the manner suggested in the original post.

And a sizable number of male posters are telling you that you are wrong with respect to teenage boys. I assume that you are female from your handle; maybe you should listen to the voice of experience.

By the way, back in the 50’s, in some states the age of consent was different for the two sexes. If memory serves, there were at least two cases (N.Y.? and possibly KY or TN) where younger “adult” females were charged with having sex with an older but still “under age” male.

Steve2: The only way sex can be emotionally traumatizing to anyone, male or female, is if it’s rape.

Oh, come on. There are plenty of ways that the highly complicated human mind can have issues with sex short of all-out rape, that have nothing to do with statutory consent. Be realistic.

Arguments like Suzy’s seem to rest on the notion that minors are more likely to be vulnerable to these complications than an older, more mature mind, and that combined with a reduced ability to understand complexity and long-term outcomes, renders minors less competent to give consent than adults. (Suzy, correct me if I’m wrong.)

Twirlip:
I don’t believe that the law has any damn busness in creating “classes” of people who are subject to different laws.

Firearm carry for prisoners versus nonprisoners. Tax benefits for those with dependent children versus those without dependent children. Fines for reckless drivers versus cautious drivers.

Problem?

Kurmudge: If he was wrong, there would be as much pornography directed at women as there is at men

The evidence suggests that while men are more stimulated by visual imagery, women are more stimulated by fantasy. How many romance novels are directed at men? I find romance novels to be as sexist and degrading to men as porn is arguably to women, but hey. And if you extend the inference to chick flicks, pardon me, romantic comedies ...

The difference really isn’t that notable when you consider romantic fantasy to be the female version of porn. Just comes in a different form for women.

jay-w: A species in which the females were biologically ready to reproduce at, say, 14; but not mature enough to care for the offspring until, say, 21 would become extinct — especially a species in which there is a high risk of dying in childbirth.If human females in the 14 to 18 age bracket were really such immature airheads, our species would not have survived the Ice age.

Read my above post. Evolution doesn’t take any function and perfect it; all it has to do is get the function functional, just barely, to the point where it confers benefit.

Under previous human conditions, the cost of delaying childrearing was too high. Now, that cost has dropped, because our adaptive conditions have changed. A mother today doesn’t just need to worry about leopards and where dinner comes from, she also has to think about her baby’s MMR vaccine, and the mortgage payment coming up, and when she can schedule the babysitter to take care of the kids while she gets the car repaired before the transmission finally gives out ...

The data are overwhelming that teenagers, in our country at least, tend to make shitty parents. The teen parents themselves have higher rates of divorce, unemployment, and substance abuse, and so do their kids when they grow up. Older parents can and do, on average, provide a higher quality of care for their children. Of course, past ~30, the quality of genetic material starts to decline, which becomes a rapid decline by ~40. But it’s really not unreasonable to say that the environmental conditions for a modern human in a first-world country now find it more adaptive to begin childrearing at 20–25 instead of 14–17.

Twirlip: In some sort of abstract theoretical sense, perhaps. In practice STD’s exist because they travel fairly easily from person to person. If men were so unlikely to pick up STD’s from women then women would be unlikely to ever get them from men, because the men would not have them to begin with.
The typical man with gonorrhea got it from a woman, who got it from a man, who got it from a woman, who got it ......

Of course it has to be fairly easy, but not equally easy. IIRC pitcher -> catcher transmission is about 4 times as likely as the other way around, which is why it spread faster among gay men, since they both pitch and catch.

Umm, who said anythin about coercion? We have been talking about consensual sex and whether there was a difference between teenage girls’ and boys’ likelihood of traumatization.

Right, and I’m saying that when a teenager has sex with an adult, he or she can experience trauma, shame, and regret. Not all teenagers will experience this, of course. But some will, because they are not yet capable of exercising their judgment in the matter, just like they aren’t ready to take responsibility for driving a car or consenting to chemotherapy. We try to pick an age when we think most of them are, or are not, to help draw these lines.

Males and females have all sorts of differences, but the differences for which we have actual evidence aren’t relevant to judging who would experience what degree of emotional trauma. The very fact that there are such strong cultural stereotypes about this is telling. First, it would make it very hard to get good data about people’s reactions. Are boys even likely to report such a thing or seek help dealing with the fallout? I mean, look at all the people who would be laughing them out of the room, on the assumption that every young boy dreams of this experience? And they may be extremely ashamed of their own feelings about what has happened, as a result. The bottom line is that it’s not the sort of thing you could weigh in the manner suggested in the original post.

Or even when you propose different punishments for drunk drivers based on their age.

Well, my list was meant to illustrate problems with your apparent allergy to laws that classify people into different groups. Such laws are quite common and are not going away. If you have philosphical objections to such laws, good luck changing them. It would be more productive to argue why, on a case-by-case basis, we should not classify people into groups (e.g., old versus young), or why, in the case of age-based classifications, we should shift the threshold age.

You’re right that none of my examples are apt with respect to the issue sex differences in punishments — but so what? If it could be shown that providing harsher penalities for particular crimes (statuatory rape involving girls but not boys) would reduce misconduct against a target group with no obvious cost, what’s the problem? (I think the problem is that such laws offend your sensibilities.)

And you’re verging on Dworkin territory and “all sex between men and women is assault”.

A low blow, and conduct unbecoming of commenter. Where’s Posner when I need him?

Suzy: Loki13: I respect your feelings about your children, but not all parents feel this way. I am equally upset about the prospect of a 15 year old son or daughter having sex with an adult. I think it could harm each very much, even if specifics will differ for each child, as the result of several unique circumstances. Gender is only one of those conditions.

Suzy,

Appreciated, but I think I made a few points, some explicit, some implict.

1. I would have the age of consent be 16, not 15.
2. It would be the same for boys and girls (or men and women, if you prefer).
3. I think there’s a difference in parental worry about the children, because of the adverse consequences, but there shouldn’t be a difference in the “morality” of the act; it’s a inherently “good” or “bad” for the boy as the girl.
4. I think there’s a difference between what’s illegal as opposed to what’s bad. As I mentioned, I think that people in positions of authority and trust with teens and young adults (teachers, coaches, professors) should be held, legally, to a higher standard (the no-sex standard) than the general population, because of their position. In the same way that pilots are held to a higher standard (alcohol and drug testing) because of their job, I think people in these positions should be as well. As a parent, I don’t want my 16/17 year old involved with someone that’s 30. I think there’s something wrong with the 30-year old that does that — not pedophilia, but a lack of maturity on their part. But that’s an issue for parenting and community, not for the law.

Speaking only to the emotional aspects, I believe it is accepted science that females mature both physically and emotionally earlier than males. There is also a long literary and historical tradition of younger women begin attracted to older men (and vice versa). This is considered normal to such an extent that in many cultures, it is not commented on. This is not to say that a seventeen old girl ought to form an attachment with a thirty-year old male. However, it is not unheard of. On the male side, it is quite true that most teenage boys’ hormones are working overtime. It is also true that very few seventeen year old boys would refuse the chance to sleep with an attractive twenty-something (or even thirty-something)woman. That being said, the emotional implications are way beyond most boys’ ability to handle, especially if the relationship is deeper than the proverbial one-night stand type.

Seventeen is a very difficult age for both sexes and I would assume that the emotional results of sex with a much older person would vary depending on the personality of the younger partner. However, I do not believe that saying girls automatically would suffer more emotionally is true. I think that on average, the seventeen year old girl would be better equipped, if only by reason of her more advanced maturation. However, i would never deny that in both cases, there is a serious possibility for emotional damage. And as I said at the top, in the case of the girl, the potential for physical damage is far higher.

No. At 15 I’d have done Maggie Thatcher if she gave me a sultry look, and felt good about it. Elizabeth II would have had to buy me a few drinks.

Is Sex More Likely To Be Emotionally Traumatizing for 17-Year-Old Boys or Girls?

No.

You claim both that men get STD’s from prostitutes, and by implication at a non-trivial rate, and also that women do not tend to spread STD’s to men.

I do claim that yes, some non-trivial percentage of STD transmissions occur when men have sex with prostitutes. No where have I said that women do not tend to spread STD’s to men; this is something your own imagination cooked up, and the vehemence with which you have attacked this is just plain nutso.

By the way, are you ever going to address the comment where I point out that although you claim that you never said anything about the statistical impossibility of asymmetric HIV transmission rates between the genders, you actually did say exactly that as a simple search on this very webpage proves?

Although I think I understand where your confusion comes from. You think that the male-to-female tranmission rate is defined as the percentage of women who acquired HIV from men. Then your ignorance caused you to misread what I wrote in response. You’re not crazy, just one of those folks who’s just too dumb to understand how dumb you are.

Just a woman may have rape fantasies, that doesn’t mean she wants raped, nor would not find being raped hugely traumatic. Just because 15 year old boys thought in their immaturity that would like to have sex with any female within sight...that’s quite different from actually doing the deed. Faced with reality, our illusions soon crumble. The 15 year old boy would soon realize the uneven nature of the act, recognize the manipulation, and would indeed be just as traumatized as a girl. He’d never mention it, and make statements of pride as compensating behavior...for deep down he’d realize he was totally at the disadvantage...and that is emasculating to a man, just as being “spoilt” is to a woman’s sense of self.

I have no idea why you are so crazy about this topic. Maybe you are embarassed about something?

I’m not crazy about your silly topic, in any sense of crazy. You’re the one who seems anxious to talk about it. My basic point was and continues to be that EV’s argument is a mess. If we assume for the sake of argument the 100% truth of all the things EV said about STD’s, sex, men, and women, it gets us exactly nowhere on the question of whether statutory rape laws are defensible.

This is because these things are features of ALL sex, not just that sex which is classified as statutory rape.

Since you are so axious to talk about it, your own position contradicts itself. You claim both that men get STD’s from prostitutes, and by implication at a non-trivial rate, and also that women do not tend to spread STD’s to men. Assuming the prostitutes in queston are women, your argument falls apart.

Perhaps you are envisaging a scenario in which men have sex with gay male prostitutes and then later spread STD’s to female partners. I don’t think that’s what you meant, but you’re not most pellucid writer I’ve ever come across.

I don’t. But that doesn’t invalidate my comment. But anyhoo, if you know any men that regret that they didn’t wait until later to have sex, please share, even if that man is you.

As for my possible reaction, what do you think I’m going to do? Hit them in the mouth for saying they regret doing something in the past? That’s absurd. I’m a true follower of Bette Midler, who said that Edith Piaf is wrong — I regret *everything*!

There are very good reasons why justice is supposed to be blind.

And you have not mentioned, at any level of specificity, any such reasons as they relate to this topic.

I most certainly did. I suggest you go back and read what I wrote.

Laws don’t cut people into groups with the precision of a scalpel; they cut people into groups with the precision of a meat cleaver.

Laws ought not cut people into groups at all. Law is supposed to be uniform and impartial. You sound like an avid cheerleader for “hate crimes laws”.

Drinking age (some underage folks might be able to consume responsibly)

When you propose different punishments for different drunk drivers based on their sex or race, you will have a point. Or even when you propose different punishments for drunk drivers based on their age. Until then, you don’t. For an analogy to be useful it must have some passing familiarity to to the thing being analogized.

That would seem to be statistically impossible.

in response to the quoted comment:

Also, unless I’m mistaken, females are more likely to get HIV from males than vice versa

Then later he writes:

I said nothing at all about HIV or womens “statistically impossible” odds of getting it or not getting it. No. Thing. At. All.

Are there two Twirlips? This one is getting a bit tedious.

you’re completely insane. I started interacting with you because you came in and insisted that it was statistically impossible that women are more likely to get AIDS from men than vice versa.

You’re “completely insane” if you think I ever said any such thing. I said nothing at all about HIV or womens “statistically impossible” odds of getting it or not getting it. No. Thing. At. All.

I will say something now, so you’re so anxious to talk about. In Africa the primary mechanism for the spread of AIDs is hetrosexual sex. Men get it from women and women get it from men. Just like any other STD.

EV’s basic argument here remains absurd, as was pointed out in the very first comment on this thread. STD’s, AIDs, pregnancy, etc are doubtless all very bad things. Or at least can be sometimes very bad things as in the case of pregnancy. But they have not one blessed thing to do with statutory rape. I’m frankly surprised that Eugene offered such a threadbare argument to support his case.

Suzy: Kurmudge: I accept the idea that the sexes are different, and that the capacities for pregnancy or more ready transmission of STDs are relevant physical differences. However, I don’t see any evidence that there is a difference in the emotional trauma involved. Indeed, the very fact that people would expect a difference could contribute to the trauma! Can you imagine being one of the 15 year old boys who not only is ashamed at having been coerced into sex with an older person, but then has to hear all the reasons why in our society, and because of his being male, it shouldn’t be as big a deal to him? What matters is how the individual is impacted. Even so, the evidence for psychological differences here is pretty minimal. Both sexes experience trauma, shame, and regret when they are coerced into sex that they didn’t clearly choose for themselves.

Umm, who said anythin about coercion? We have been talking about consensual sex and whether there was a difference between teenage girls’ and boys’ likelihood of traumatization. Dave Hardy had it right at the beginning of this thread. Teenage boys would be lining up to be “traumatized.” The real trauma, from a 15-year-old boy’s perspective, would be having this fairy tale experience end. Worse, having his mom get all upset and in his face about it — don’t confuse that reaction with shame and embarrassment.

There are some interesting gender and generational differences here, I suspect. I referred to “Summer of ’42″ in a comment above. I don’t recall anything remotely like a controversy about the movie at the time.

According to the Wikipedia article about the movie, the author of the book it was based upon stated that:

[Raucher] never saw her again; his last “encounter” with her, recounted on an episode of The Mike Douglas Show, came after the film’s release in 1971, when she was one of over a dozen women who wrote letters to Raucher claiming to be “his” Dorothy. Raucher recognized the “real” Dorothy’s handwriting, and she confirmed her identity by making references to certain events only she could have known about. She told Raucher that she had lived for years with the guilt that she had potentially traumatized him and ruined his life. She told Raucher that she was glad he turned out all right, and that they had best not re-visit the past.

Summer of ’42

A couple of observations — first, apparently there were a lot of older women having sex with teenagers at the beach in 1942. Second, while the woman was worried about having traumatized the kid, he was fine — she wasted her guilt.

Normal conversation when I meet someone:
Them: So you’re married?
Me: Yeah.
Them: How long have you been married?
Me: Seven years and a bit.
Them: Wow, and you’re what, 28, 29?
Me: 26, actually.
Them: So you got married young. Were you pregnant?

The idea that an 18 year old would be smart enough to use birth control, driven enough to get two bachelor’s degrees and a JD, and feel mature enough to want to get married blows people’s minds.

It wasn’t that long ago that men and women of that age were enlisting in the military and getting married; oh wait a moment that still happens.

The only “scarring” that I can think of would come from the societal reaction as the as both feminists and right wingers fight over who is going to persecute the couple for daring to exist. Nothing brings out the real predators like a slabs of fresh meet.

One day people will see the irrational and hate filled logic behind the question for what it is, until then
sex is so oppressive, degrading, and evil we can only do it with the ones we truly love.

I’m a doc, and have been for nearly 40 years.

The problem is not age of consent (which should be 16 for boys and 15 for girls) but who is doing the seduction/rape.

Teachers shouldn’t be having sex with pupils, professors shouldn’t be having sex with their students, and physicians shouldn’t be having sex with their patients.

On the other hand, I’m also old enough to remember “the good old days” when it was considered “normal” for businessmen to be having sex with their secretaries, physicians with their nurses, and professors with any nubile girl they wanted, and when I was in high school, such romances with teachers were considered “cute”.

I’m not sure which is better. Take sex outside of marriage/commitment and it degrades a young person’s ability to form mature relationships, and leaves a lot of kids brought up with poverty or young women emotionally scarred by aborting their children.

Whether this is better than the “good old days” of shotgun weddings and couples living together miserably is another question I hesitate to answer.

In their brains, they probably DO feel the same about what’s going on with them biologically. Perhaps our hypothetical girl just wants MORE from the interaction, while out boy wants MORE interactions.
However.
Neither one of them is really mature enough to consent to that. True, in our earlier days, we might’ve been MARRIED shortly after 18, but that also doesn’t mean we were old enough to figure it out. That was a social construct and rather rigid, where neither one could change it. Maturity wasn’t as important in such a situation.

Current consent, even though informed by some prety old laws, does try to take into account. That outside of that marriage, and it’s social construct, you don’t really want immature people making such decisions. But regardless of the dreams of young men, they cannot be treated differently under the law than young women. No matter how hot Mrs. Robinson is.

This is a place where we certainly need to start seeing the equality of law, so that those equality issues can extend to other gender situations.