I'm not in the mood to engage here - too many people are using this as an opportunity to dismiss sexual harassment and that there are relationships that are inherently imbalanced
My asshole former county attorney barely got convicted of some fourth degree misdemeanor something for abusing a 17-year-old. He got maybe a few months probation and didn’t have to register. What gets defined as a custodial relationship under the law can be very narrow. Even your prison guard example is not clearly illegal in every state. Is that right? Absolutely not, but the law sucks at some things, and insisting it’s clearer than it is doesn’t make it so. In any case, the guy in the article wasn’t prosecuted over the custodial relationship. Maybe he could/should have been (again, doubtful in the 90s), but he wasn’t. This isn’t a good example for the case you’re trying to make.
There are a lot of overheated persons who are not at all conscious of how triggering the dismissal of this guy's actual conduct is for persons who have suffered sexual abuse by people in authority positions or family sexual abuse - rather typical of the way dissent is treated at this site, I'm afraid
I've always had good interactions with you, so farewell if I get banned for standing up for victims of sexual abuse by persons in trust positions here
I just think the way you stand up for victims of abuse of power is by fixing the laws regarding relationships that are inherently abusive, not by letting stand a prosecution that was grounded in anti-sodomy laws and is considerably more punitive than what happened to the middle-aged, heterosexual former county attorney in my town. I’m kind of leery of the whole sex offender registry idea in general—much as some days I wish my abuser had to wear a scarlet letter, I don’t rationally think that should be the law—but that’s a different debate.
Enabling rape culture? Nobody raped anybody. The sex was consensual. The two boys were legal age to consent. Did you complain as much when Brock Turner got off the hook because his daddy is wealthy?
That would be outraging public morality... obviously. My pont was just that "sodomy" as a criminal offense, is pretty much limited to legal codes inherited by the British. Here in Mexico, we've used a modified Napoleonic code since the 1850s, and gay sex itself has never been a crime, though of course, homophobia and repression existed (and still do).
The charge was "Crimes Against Nature". He was NOT convicted of custodial sexual violence abuse. I am curious how you came up with the idea that he acted in the capacity of 'custodian' to the people he had sex with?
I'm not in the mood to engage here - too many people are using this as an opportunity to dismiss sexual harassment and that there are relationships that are inherently imbalanced
Another misogynistic jerk to block
My asshole former county attorney barely got convicted of some fourth degree misdemeanor something for abusing a 17-year-old. He got maybe a few months probation and didn’t have to register. What gets defined as a custodial relationship under the law can be very narrow. Even your prison guard example is not clearly illegal in every state. Is that right? Absolutely not, but the law sucks at some things, and insisting it’s clearer than it is doesn’t make it so. In any case, the guy in the article wasn’t prosecuted over the custodial relationship. Maybe he could/should have been (again, doubtful in the 90s), but he wasn’t. This isn’t a good example for the case you’re trying to make.
I actually fully agree with you about the principle. Did you somehow get the impression I’m *happy* my own abuse doesn’t “count” in Pennsylvania???
It's my understanding that teh breeders are doing WAY more butt stuff than teh gheys....
There are a lot of overheated persons who are not at all conscious of how triggering the dismissal of this guy's actual conduct is for persons who have suffered sexual abuse by people in authority positions or family sexual abuse - rather typical of the way dissent is treated at this site, I'm afraid
I've always had good interactions with you, so farewell if I get banned for standing up for victims of sexual abuse by persons in trust positions here
Sounds like "BrokeBack Mountain"....
I just think the way you stand up for victims of abuse of power is by fixing the laws regarding relationships that are inherently abusive, not by letting stand a prosecution that was grounded in anti-sodomy laws and is considerably more punitive than what happened to the middle-aged, heterosexual former county attorney in my town. I’m kind of leery of the whole sex offender registry idea in general—much as some days I wish my abuser had to wear a scarlet letter, I don’t rationally think that should be the law—but that’s a different debate.
He's clearly very offended that anyone would dare accuse him of criming.
Enabling rape culture? Nobody raped anybody. The sex was consensual. The two boys were legal age to consent. Did you complain as much when Brock Turner got off the hook because his daddy is wealthy?
Sure. And being kept on the Sex Offenders Registry for the rest of his life also has nothing to do with his homosexuality. Also, pigs can fly.
https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
That would be outraging public morality... obviously. My pont was just that "sodomy" as a criminal offense, is pretty much limited to legal codes inherited by the British. Here in Mexico, we've used a modified Napoleonic code since the 1850s, and gay sex itself has never been a crime, though of course, homophobia and repression existed (and still do).
Exactly how was this rape?
The charge was "Crimes Against Nature". He was NOT convicted of custodial sexual violence abuse. I am curious how you came up with the idea that he acted in the capacity of 'custodian' to the people he had sex with?
I guess just because weirdo let a couple of campers have a swordfight in his mouth I should feel bad for him, but nah.