|
Copping a Feel
There have been two cases
in the news recently, concerning police officers having consensual sexual
relations with sixteen-year-olds. Both police officers were men in their
thirties, and both took place in the same state, but only one of the police
officers is being charged with statutory rape. The difference? His sixteen-year-old
was male.
It stands to reason that
age of consent laws differ from state to state. The constitution was written
to preserve state’s rights, and if an issue is not specifically addressed
in the constitution it is left to the individual states to decide. Because
of this the age at which you may drive a car, own a firearm, have sex or
even marry are determined by state law. Providing you live near the state
border, a short car trip is often all that’s needed to avoid breaking the
law. When I was sixteen the legal drinking age in NH was eighteen, but
in Vermont… Ah, but I digress.
Obviously those who wrote
the age of consent laws were doing so to protect minors. They believed
(possibly correctly) that a minor was not (emotionally) mature enough to
engage in a consensual sexual relationship. The age of consent throughout
the US ranges from fourteen to eighteen. What is curious, is the fact that
within a state, the age of consent can differ between the genders. In Montana
a male reaches the age of consent at sixteen, but a female doesn’t till
she is eighteen. This begs the question: "What are those sixteen year old
boys supposed to screw?" Not each other, that’s for sure. The age of consent
for homosexuals in Montana is eighteen. Why?
Understanding the discrepancy
in the age of connect between males and females isn’t hard. It is just
a manifestation of the sexual double standard. Consider that most lawmakers
are male and toss in a "wink wink" mentality and it’s all pretty clear.
A guy is supposed to have multiple sex partners and getting started early
is expected, but a girl is supposed to save herself for marriage. Why then
is sixteen year old male mature enough handle sex with a female, but NOT
mature enough handle a sexual relationship with another male? Consider
please that most lawmakers are heterosexual and toss in a "gay sex is icky"
mentality and this too, is pretty clear. The very fact that these laws
exist and remain on the books serves to establish homosexuals as second
class citizens.
The fact is that statuary
rape and age of consent laws are arbitrary and oft ignored in all but the
most extreme cases. Two teenagers in the back seat of a car on lover’s
lane might get a stern warning from the cop who discovers them. Parents
who are aware of their teen’s sexual activities usually choose to put a
stop to it themselves rather than call the police. Though we may not approve,
we expect our teens to be, at the very least, curious about sex. It is
not until homosexuality enters the equation that we become concerned. A
teenaged boy sleeping with an older woman conjures up images of Mrs. Robinson,
and it’s looked on as a learning experience. The same boy sleeping with
an older man is being corrupted and abused.
I don’t know the details
concerning the police officers and their young lovers I mentioned earlier,
and I suspect the details are not important. It is possible that in both
cases the older partner is a player, using a young innocent for sexual
gratification and nothing more. It’s also equally possible that the parties
are involved in loving, potentially long-term relationships. I do know,
however, that if a person (male or female) is mature enough at age sixteen
(seventeen, eighteen or twenty one) to engage in a sexual relationship,
the gender of their partner is irrelevant.
JM
|
.
 .
|
