I think you Aussie nymphomaniacs may be hitting on another point. It seems like Americans are pretty sexually repressed, which would make us more likely to be abused from sex. I would say though that when I was 15, I was willing and wanted to have sex(unfortunately I wasn't the stud Ishy was), and I find it highly doubtful that I would've been abused by it regardless of the age of my counterpart. I feel like most guys are the same way. I can't speak for girls, but it seems like an insult to their sexual maturity to suggest there should be a double standard.

rockthief, I agree on the importance of power. I would extend the point to saying that statutory rape does not imply a power struggle. On the contrary, for most cases I find it tough to read further into it than a mutual horniness.

Oh, and I was just kidding about the nympho comment guys... except for Ish. You might want to get yourself checked out.

quote:

rockthief, I agree on the importance of power. I would extend the point to saying that statutory rape does not imply a power struggle. On the contrary, for most cases I find it tough to read further into it than a mutual horniness.

I think differential power is the key element, and I'm glad rockthief brought it up. Statutory rape can absolutely be about power. Like I said before, the difference between a 23 year old and a 20 year old is negligible. The difference between a 17 year old and an average 14 year old is huge.*


*Please note that I said "average," so none of the above comments apply to Ishy.

quote:

Originally posted by kendocubano:
The difference between a 17 year old and an average 14 year old is huge.

I don't know KC. The age range of our high school was 14 through about 18, and I remember having friends who were Juniors or Seniors when I was a 14 yr old Freshman. It didn't seem like they were that much "older" than me.

Also, when I was old enough to get a crappy job (16/17), I worked with people who were well into their 20s. We'd occasionally hang out after work, and I never had the impression that they were weirdly old. They couldn't have been that much more mature than me...we were working the same dead-end minimum wage job.

Again, I'm speaking from personal experience. I don't know about the average person.

The plural of anecdote is not data, eric

I agree with kendo on this one. Three years makes a huge difference from about the ages of 14-25.

quote:

Originally posted by kendocubano:
Statutory rape can absolutely be about power.

Oh, I agree it CAN be about power, but it doesn't have to be. That's why I think statutory needs to be looked at on a case-by-case basis.

quote:

Originally posted by less_success:
I agree with kendo on this one. Three years makes a huge difference from about the ages of 14-25.

A lot of it depends on the person. Some 21 year olds are out of college, embarking on a career, and thinking about starting families, while some are still living with their parents, working minimum wage jobs and partying every night. Maturity is dependent on a lot of factors other than age, which is why I say the topic of statutory rape is a tricky one.

quote:

Originally posted by less_success:
The plural of anecdote is not data, eric

You understand, less, that you actually brought a tear to my eye. You've made an old man very happy.

quote:

Posted by Major Nougat
Oh, and I was just kidding about the nympho comment guys... except for Ish. You might want to get yourself checked out.

That comment was better than sex...

every one of the people in our sex offender unit stated that power was the driving force and powerful it was in a terribly corrupted way.

thanks for not including me in the nympho comment major it definately depends on the people involved, if you are all for it, why the hell not?

plus i didn't get laid till i was 20, so us aussies all aren't nymphos.

The sexual repression that you speak of seems evident in many of the the things that reach our shorelines. In australia, violence is a very censored thing, whereas in the u.s. the most censored thing seems to be sex. What i have gathered from the forums is that the u.s. age of consent is 18? in australia it is 16.

the u.s. seems more intent on blocking sexual material than violent material towards the masses.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Kyla,

While checking news on the internet this morning, I came across another story dealing with repeat offenders. Although the description isn’t terribly graphic, the mental images and the story itself are.

From foxnews.com July 25, 2007

PALM BEACH GARDENS, Fla. — A 26-year-old man was held Tuesday on suspicion of first-degree murder and sexual battery after his father found a woman's body in his closet, authorities said. Jason Shenfeld's parents noticed their son seemed nervous and was locking his bedroom door. When his father went into Shenfeld's room on Friday night, he found 18-year-old Amanda Buckley's body stuffed in his closet, according to a Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office report. Shenfeld told his father the teen had overdosed on drugs and he panicked, the report said. However, investigators say they found duct tape in Buckley's hair, bruises on her body and evidence of rape, according to the report. An autopsy revealed the girl was strangled, beaten and sexually abused. Shenfeld was arrested on suspicion of first-degree murder, sexual battery and false imprisonment.....
....Shenfeld was released from jail in February after being arrested and accused of sexually assaulting two other women. Charges in that case were eventually dropped because of "conflicts in evidence," according to court records. Prosecutors declined to comment.

Stories like this fuel my hardlined stance on sex offenders and our nation's policies. Is prison really going to rehabilitate a violent sex offender? This guy, who now will serve the rest of his life behind bars, was and is a waste of skin and oxygen. I realize that we can't just line 'em all up for the gallows but there has to be something that can be done. You show me one instance of a "reformed" sex offender who tours the country speaking about the obstacles he overcame, while writing books for children, and helping others avoid a similar lifestyle, and I'll show you one asshole who controls his desires or just hasn't been caught again. People don't just change that easily.

The idea of redemption is clearly not something you can agree with then p-bo?

I believe in redemption, and I am thoroughly anti-religious. I know that people can change. Not easily, but some do.

quote:

Originally posted by Ishmaels coffin:
I know that people can change. Not easily, but some do.

However, the problem with most sexual offenders is they have to work up to the point of sexual assault. So, by the time they've committed the act, there's really no turning back. It becomes a need. In fact, some of these guys actually believe they are protecting the girl, woman, or child in a sick & twisted way. There was a case of an abductor kidnapping a child, raping them, & then dropping them off wherever they were headed. Just to make sure they got there! This guy had been doing it for over 30 years & probably would have never been caught if not for the fact that he went after his nephews. 30 years! Hundreds of victims! Is there going to be any rehabilitation here? I don't think so. And this isn't an isolated incident, this is the case with many sexual predators. For someone to go after women, children, & yes, even men (Bob Berdella My family actually knew this guy!), there is something not quite right in their head. I mean, to sit & come to the conclusion that it is alright to do these things screams, "I'm sick in the head!" Could any of us perform the vile acts that any of these characters have done: Rape, sexual abuse, & murder? I know I couldn't & I'm pretty sure no one else here could. This then brings us to the question of, what should we do with them? Lock 'em up & throw away the key. Yes, redemption is a religious ideal, but even Jesus said, "But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck & to be drowned in the depths of the sea."- Matthew 18:6

Monkey, I don't believe any individual here is condoning harming others or saying that those that commit acts of violence should not be punished. I simply believe that the punishment should fit the crime and that when an individual is deemed 'fit for society' they not be punished further by a 'Sex offender registry.'

I find it appauling that those of a religious stance are unable to accept concepts such as 'Forgiveness' or 'Salvation.'

quote:

Originally posted by Mike:
I find it appauling that those of a religious stance are unable to accept concepts such as 'Forgiveness' or 'Salvation.'

This has nothing to do with either one. Should they be forgiven? Yes. Can they get salvation? Sure, I have no problem with that. However, when it comes to crimes as heinous as these, is there a punishment that can fit the crime? Being locked away for eternity just doesn't seem long enough. Just ask a victim. As I said, once the line has been crossed (& it's not like it's an easy one to cross) the effects aren't so easily reversed. We're not talking about a petty thief. This is sexual desire we're talking about here. If there is one thing about humans, sex takes precedence over every other desire. This is what makes them so dangerous. It's all about whether they can control themselves. Since they've done it before, it wouldn't be so hard for 'em to try it again. Would anyone who has children really be able to trust them to control themselves? These people are manipulators. They gain the trust of a child, & then throw it back in their face. Victims of other crimes can move on but survivors of a sexual assault go through paranoid hell the rest of their lives. Should the one who put that fear in them live a normal life after their time has been served?

As for the "dangers" of the registration, there haven't been any instances of revenge since it has been established. (I could understand the concern if there were.) It's not like these guys don't know the consequences of their actions, they aren't innocent in any way. No, I'm not saying you're claiming they are, but some of you seem to be losing sight of how atrocious their deeds are. These guys are disgusting & at the bottom of the barrel even by criminal standards. I understand that there are those that are basically innocent of any real threats to children or women & that they're on the list because of stupid things like urinating in public. But, there are also innocent people in jail for other crimes. The system isn't perfect, & it probably never will be, but all we can do is try to come up with ways to make things just a tad safer. Some believe the registry is useless, but there are those who would like to know just who has moved into the neighborhood & who their kids are coming into contact with.

OK then, for the pedophiles and repeat sexual offenders, would chemical castration suffice? Or would they still have to be locked away? I'm not talking about statutory rapists unless they are knowing repeaters, but I don't even want to bring this up, but it seems like people are getting farther apart rather than closer together. I just thought I'd throw that out. I'm not advocating it, but I can tell you that the sexual desire will be pretty much nil with castration, although if somebody is so "depraved", they could still get touchy if that's the way they're programmed.

I confess to not being up on chemical castration.

Does anyone know what it involves? Sounds nasty.

quote:

Originally posted by Ishmaels coffin:
I confess to not being up on chemical castration.

Does anyone know what it involves? Sounds nasty.

This should tell ya plenty my floating pine overcoat ! I would say castration should be the way to go for anyone who is a repeat offender. If you can't be responsible with 'em, ya lose 'em!

A-ha!

The old Depo-Provera shot in your arm trick.

Had a few girlfriends who swore by that stuff.

I guess the problem is that is an ongoing, mandatory injection program would have to be carefully monitored.
Costs of the drug, the monitoring doctor etc.....

Still, if an repeat offender is showing no signs of remorse or self-control, then this chemical suppresant may well be the best option.

quote:

Originally posted by Ishmaels coffin:
Still, if an repeat offender is showing no signs of remorse or self-control, then this chemical suppresant may well be the best option.

Sorry if this is a bit nit-picky, but I think that self-control is the issue more than remorse. If they show no remorse, I'm not convinced it'll even work. If they're remorseful but don't have the self-control, then we have a legitimate issue. I would like to think that most repeat offenders feel remorse about what they do, but lack the self-control to stop it.

Not surprisingly, I'd be pretty reluctant to suggest the chemical castration route. There's something that feels dehumanizing about it, but I think I prefer it to the self-policing public registry we have in its stead.