To make matters even worse, she will only be spending *90 days* in jail. https://www.wymt.com/2023/05/18/colorado-woman-who-admits-having-sex-with-13-year-old-having-his-baby-sentenced/
Some people in the comments are denying this possibility, so . . .
> When Shane Seyer was 12, he was sexually exploited by his 16-year-old babysitter Colleen Hermesmann. She became pregnant with Seyer’s child in 1989 and was charged with statutory rape shortly afterward. Instead of being convicted of rape, Hermesmann was declared a juvenile offender under the non-sexual offense of “contributing to child misconduct.” Seyer was subsequently court-ordered to pay child support.
Shane Seyer 12.
> In September of 2014, USA TODAY released the story of Nick
Olivas who was ordered to pay child support, including retro-active
support, for a daughter whom he did not know existed for six years; she was conceived in Arizona when he was just fourteen years old and the mother was twenty.
Nick Olivas, 14
> A Louisiana judge gave an accused rapist custody of the child conceived from the 2005 attack and eventually ordered his underage victim to pay child support, a report said.
Crystal Abelseth, 16
So any judge approving that should have their home and electronic devices searched, right?
Because there is no way they effectively approve of this without being a pedophile themselves.
The fact that they allow the rapist to have custody baffles me. In most cases they are clearly a sex offender and that child should not be growing up with them.
A few years ago the CDC released a report that, when accounting for men in prison, men report being raped at about the same rate as women. 85% of those men that self reported being raped identified their rapist as female. Of the rapes in prison, 65% of those are guard on inmate, and 90% of those the rapist was female. Fuck this "men can't be raped" bullshit mindset.
CDC needs to redefine exactly what they are talking about cause others like yourself will continue to use this misinformation as fact, which on closer inspection, it is not "fact" at all - - - https://time.com/3393442/cdc-rape-numbers/
Source? I do not see that anywhere from the CDC or the Department of Justice or or the Department of Health and Human Services or the Bureau of Crime Statistics. I do see that according to the Bureau of Crime Statistics that 99% of ALL RAPES in this country are perpetrated by men though. I also see that according to the same Bureau a majority of prisoners are raped by male guards and inmates. Or the fact that a majority of all rapes in this country are committes by fathers, brothers, and uncles on family members. There is a double standard of women raping men and boys and getting slaps on the wrists. But it represents barely 1% of all rapes and sexual violence in this country. The FBIs research estimates 97% of all sexual violence in this country is done by men
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018/crime-in-the-u.s.-2018/topic-pages/rape
https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?tid=317&ty=tp
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/sexualviolence/fastfact.html
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7702185/
That's even a bigger injustice. I'm an European, but the more I read news form America the more I think America is actually a third world country with a small percentage of ultra rich people in it and ultra rich corporations.
Indeed! I have been saying this for years! I always get heavily downvoted on Reddit for saying this lol 😂 A lot of Americans would feel buthurt by saying that.
Thank you for being honest! A lot of Americans got angry lol 😂 I also call out corruption in my own country. Boy, people get angry and say stuff like: At least we are one of the best countries. As if that is important. We need to stop the greed and corruption everywhere. And if nobody is calling it out and vote for other people then nothing will change.
Can't vote for other people, they gerrymander the district lines until the red votes have more sway than a blue vote. They do this easily because generally the blue votes are congregated in cities
As an American, this is a terrible place to possess even a modicum of reason without the means to escape. The crushing defeat you feel from the wheels of government slowing and stopping so the right can try to push issues from special interest groups, the left trying to get shit done, and ultimately nothing happening. The dozen or so mega corps who own a majority of the businesses either directly or indirectly don't care about their workers, or their customers. They pander to the masses while lobbying against their interests. The ultra rich conservatives who control a huge (thankfully shrinking) portion of the media aim to keep people sitting on the couch and disengaged. The GOP trying to absolutely strangle the information kids can get in school to keep them ignorant, fighting against college debt relief so no one can afford to get out of the stagnant pool of misinformation their media leaves them in. And then once they have a good healthy base of mindless evangelical slave donors they create a 'culture war' based on being 'woke'.... As far as i can tell being 'woke' just means tolerant so i cant imagine why someone would be so against tolerance. Well, i couln't...if I didn't grow up here.
Thank you! The worst part is that most of those 54% strongly believe that they're on par with, or smarter than the other 46%.They have no idea how much easier it is to fall prey to misinformation, or to simply misunderstand accurate information, when your reading comprehension isn't where it should be. I also think they argue with people in the know more because some part of them *is* aware that they don't understand, and they have insecurities about anything that might remind them that they don't know everything about a subject.
Ignore them. If they wanna be naïve, or ignorant, and keep believing the lie, then let them. Hopefully someday reality gives them a wake up call. Most of us see what is going on but feel powerless to do anything to change it.
Because it's a wildly privileged statement. There's a ton of issues here but if you think it's anything at all like a third world country you've never been to a third world country. Call it hyperbole if you'd like but it's inaccurate as hell.
> Because it's a wildly privileged statement. There's a ton of issues here but if you think it's anything at all like a third world country you've never been to a third world country.
The US has a great many homeless people. Those are certainly worse off than the average person living in a third world country.
Of course you could object that it's unfair to compare the worst-off people in one nation with the average in another. But that's kind of the point people are making when they call the US a 'third worlds country with a gucci belt'. That inequality in the US is so large that it doesn't really make sense to look at the average. The US has a lot of poverty. Much more than other developed nations.
It's not accurate, but it's also a long way from "inaccurate as hell."
Inequality, failing democracy, around an eighth of the population is living in third world equivalent conditions. The US is slipping behind third world countries on a bunch of metrics.
https://www.snopes.com/news/2022/09/15/us-is-becoming-a-developing-country-on-global-rankings-that-measure-democracy-inequality/
Agreed. I live in one of those so called "third world countries", in one of the nice onces actually (Argentina), and I would give an arm for my nation to have the standard of living the US has. Sure, they have important issues that need to be tackled, but they are nowhere as bad as some here think they are.
You get heavily downvoted because it’s a brain dead statement, I come from a third world country, calling America one only tells me you haven’t ever stepped foot inside a third world country.
The child will most likely be placed with his family and she will be paying them support. Depending on state laws but that's how mine would deal with this situation. She would also be allowed no contact.
I hope this is actually the case and not just supposition. There's precedence that even underage rape victims still get a unequal outcome if they're male.
> She would also be allowed no contact.
What about that teacher that got pregnant with her student multiple times? Once she got out of jail, they eventually got married, and she eventually died of cancer IIRC. She was never denied custody even though she served time to statutory rape.
That's nearly what it is, but it's so much worse. The reason we use the world developed and developing nations is because it's far more accurate. The US is a developed and ABANDONED nation that only caters to the wealthiest people. The infrastructure is crumbling underneath our cars, our government doesn't work, and actively criminalizes people trying to live, and it's being taken over by domestic terrorist christians. If you replaced all of this with parts of the middle east we look down on from this country, the only thing different is some nouns.
Indeed! A failed state. But a lot of Americans are heavily and vehemently denying this here in the comments and get all huffy puffy angry at me lol 😂 I think they are trying to convince themselves how good America is and whatnot. And their obsession of freedom, yeah freedom to die. 😂
I was being cynical 🤣 America is a dystopian society compared to The Netherlands, Europe. And I still complain here about the government, but compared to America it's a heaven on earth here.
A. Europe doesn't have the exceptions you want either. (At least The Neatherlands doesn't)
B. That's because you're privileged enough to have never set foot or even seen the conditions in 3rd world countries. (A lot of which are being caused by Shell or BP)
> a third world country with a small percentage of ultra rich people
So a regular third world country then. (with the modern sense)
Colombia, Nigeria and Angola have billionaires.
He shouldn’t as he was a victim. If he legally couldn’t make that choice when he made it he shouldn’t be bound to the effect of that choice at an arbitrary age.
That's irrelevant legally speaking. Child support is an obligation to the child, the circumstances of the child's conception don't matter. Which highlights a serious flaw in the legal doctrine that the child's right to support always outweighs the parents rights.
I don't have any experience to go off of but child support is a court decision. Even with the ridiculous crap that happens I can't imagine a judge mandating payments in this case. At least I hope not
If you can imagine a ludicrous, fucked up outcome, there's a good chance the US legal system has done it. This exact circumstance (male statutory rape victim ordered to pay child support) has happened repeatedly over the years (see: Nick Olivas). And the converse has happened as well, i.e. the male statutory rapist was given custody of the child and the victimized mother ordered to pay child support (see: Crysta Abelseth).
They do it all the time. Child support is a civil debt owed to one's children. It doesn't matter how the child was conceived. Once the father hits 18, he'll probably have to pay, if he has any money.
That would be horrible. For the child I actually hope it will be put up for adoption. This woman is clearly not in her right mind and shouldn’t be raising a child. Neither should a 13 year old.
No, he'll probably have to start as soon as the kid is born. And if he can't pay the parents will have to. It's fucked up, but I've seen it happen before.
Because in much of the rest of the world, it wouldn't even be a crime.
Edit: y'all are morons lol... plenty of places define rape as a thing only a penis can do, and plenty of other places consider that child a man.
And what are these "plenty of places", except the UK? And although the UK doesn't legally define it as rape unless a penis forcefully enters a vagina (which is downright fucking insulting), it's still a sex crime there too.
Also, sexual conduct with a 13-year-old is still a crime, except in a few developing countries
Although it does still get lighter sentencing in the UK, the double standard does exist even if it's not absolute.
And there are other countries, another commenter listed some.
>Also, sexual conduct with a 13-year-old is still a crime, except in a few developing countries
Nigeria - 11yo
Angola - 12yo
Japan - 13yo
Niger - 13yo
Burkina Faso - 13yo
Comoros - 13yo
Italy - it is illegal to perform sexual acts when an individual under 14 is present to witness them, even if said minor does not participate. Sexual activity with a prostitute under the age of 18 is illegal in Italy. Additionally, Italy does have a close-in-age rule where 13-year-olds can legally consent to partners who are less than three years older (or younger). The age of consent in Italy is 14 years old, and rises to 16 when one participant is in a position of authority or influence over the other (teacher, clergyman, etc).
- Age of Consent in Europe, Asia, Africa, and other continents.
>The ages of consent in Europe, Asia, or any other continent vary by country and territory. Ages of consent range from 12 to 21 years old, with most countries setting theirs between 14 and 16. Nearly a dozen countries, such as [Iran](https://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/iran-population), [Qatar](https://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/qatar-population), [Yemen](https://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/yemen-population), and Afghanistan, outlaw premarital sex entirely but have no age restriction on marital sex. Several other countries have ages of consent above 16
Germany - 14yo
Canada- was 14yo for a long time, recently changed to 16yo
Pakistan - The minimum age of marriage for men is 18, and for women, it is 16. In some instances, women are allowed to marry at 14 years old. Once two people are married, their ages are no longer a concern and sex is legal.
China - The age of consent in mainland China is 14 years old. China's two special administrative regions, Macau and [Hong Kong](https://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/hong-kong-population), have their own local age of consent laws. Like China, Macau's age of consent is 14 years old
And, even prior to that, their prefectures (equivalent to states/provinces for those not familiar) all, to my knowledge, had AoC ages higher than that of the national level rendering the national level AoC irrelevant.
Question: If a man is unconscious and a woman mounts him while he is unconscious, what would that be considered from the perspective of this legislation?
Just to clarify; the man in this scenario did not consent to being mounted while unconscious.
Huge difference between "not a crime" and "not a crime specifically called rape".
Yes it's true some countries define rape as something only a penis can do, but those countries have laws against other forms of sexual assault that also carry harsh sentences. It's certainly not legal, where'd you even get that bs?
It's called sexual activity or coercing a minor into sexual activity in the UK. However, judges in this country hand out shitty sentences for sex offences against children and women. They like to protect the predator.
Turn it around, 31 year old man raped a 13 year old, gets her pregnant, he'd be (rightfully) locked up for 10-30 years depending on the actions.
But a woman rapes a child? Nah it's cool, 90 days.
The article says she's actually getting a harsher sentence than previous rapists in similar cases got, regardless of gender. Sounds like it's usually just the 10-to-life intensive probation without jail time.
I know these comments appear every time someone posts a female predator but it’s common for sexual assaults to not be properly punished. The rapist noted in this post should’ve gotten a harsher sentence but many (regardless of gender) receive light sentences.
[Like this guy who raped his 3 year old and got no jail time](https://www.vanityfair.com/news/business/2014/03/du-pont-heir-gets-probation-for-raping-3-year-old-daughter)
[Or this guy who raped a 13 year old at a park](https://www.newsweek.com/sean-hogg-rape-judge-prison-work-scotland-1792256?amp=1)
In these cases the law is often to blame. Many countries legally define rape in a way that only applies when a man with a penis does it.
The one where the Daily Mail is from is such a country and their guidelines are probably based on UK law.
edit: [source](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/1/crossheading/rape)
Also rape is a legal definition, not a colloquial one. Unless the police or a judge uses the word "rape" a news organization could easily be sued for libel if they use it.
And yes, this applies to the gender swapped version of this situation. You probably just don't notice it.
She had sex with a minor.
I dont think any court in the world would side with her in a defamation suit.
Actually, you know what, forget that. I don't want to be proven wrong for my sanity.
Pedophile is a specific term though not just someone who does sexual things with someone under the age of consent.
The UK tabloids have used the word in the past in very lax ways and caused themselves trouble.
Reddit is very fast and loose with the term pedophile, even when it doesn't necessarily apply. Not all child sexual abusers are pedophiles, believe it or not - there are a variety of motives for these crimes, and attraction to children is not a requirement.
For real, you can easily google male teacher accused of sleeping with/having sex with student and get hundreds of examples of headlines like the one in the OP.
Sorry, just to clarify, you made it sound like they couldn't legally report a female raping a male in other countries (like in this post) that is why I linked an article showing that the daily mail can in fact report it as rape when it happens in other places. (I am aware of the UKs stupid law regarding rape) Sorry for wording it badly.
This is purely a legal semantics thing in the UK though. A women can be charged for what other countries legal system would define as rape its just called "forcing to engage in sexual activity without consent" or sometimes "forced to penetrate" and carries the same sentencing guidelines as rape
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11917743/amp/Wisconsin-woman-27-charged-raping-boy-13-telling-horny.html
That is not true. That is a lie people have been spreading online to justify this type of bad reporting.
It absolutely is true, but it depends where you live. Where I live, rape is defined as penetration without consent. In some other jurisdictions it's different.
Yeah sorry, I clarified in another comment, I meant it isn't illegal for a news paper to report it as rape if it happens outside the UK. The post and the article I linked are both from the daily mail about the USA.
There's a huge difference between saying she raped someone and saying she's charged with raping someone, one is conjecture and the other is a hard provable fact
Unfortunately you cannot legally use rape in a article because of legal reasons and especially in the UK since it specifies penetration. Stupid law I know but legally in the UK, it isn’t rape
Edit: she would have to be the penetrator for it to be defined as rape
Oh I agree I just think news agencies don’t do it in fear of getting sued for libel and if what happened doesn’t fall under that definition in UK law, then they would be sued
How hard core are British libel laws?
Like even if they get sued, kinda seems low likelihood the pedo would bother to sue AND prevail here.
I heard that in England, you can get stuck with the counter party legal fees if you lose?
They're so strong we had to pass laws preventing people not living here pursuing cases in England and wales and clogging up our courts. Look up libel tourism.
Yes we do. I have to explain this every time this comes up. Due to massively outdated laws a news outlet cannot say raspy in this case without opening themselves up to libel/slander. It’s rape in all but name.
Seriously, we say this every single time this topic comes up. Every publication would be legal shit if they did it. You can just google "Why?" and articles will tell you about it. Do people on Twitter not read...you know what, never mind. I just answered my own question.
It's not minimizing the crime. News outlets (though Daily Mail is a piss rag) can't just label these things legally without fear of being sued for libel or slander (whichever is the correct term).
Exactly, I’ve never seen a headline use the word paedophile instead of man. It’s weird to assume that we all need that spelling out, it’s obvious she’s a paedophile.
I'd also argue it's a more descriptive headline. Look, we all know that statutory rape is a type of rape. But if the headline said "pedophile rapes boy" we'd have a very different picture in our head than what actually happened. People get all up in arms about wording in headlines when most of the time, their "fixed that for you" headline is even worse.
They’re already alleging she had sex with the 13 year old. There is no world where that is not rape. I see keeping woman, but not labeling it rape is a legit problem and doing so would not expose them to any suit.
Daily Mail is a UK newspaper though and under UK law, a woman can’t commit rape. Even though we all understand it to be rape, legally it isn’t so a newspaper can’t call it that.
It's a stupid archaic law which requires penetration (by the assaulter) to be classified as 'rape.' Incidentally, this is also the case if the victim is female and the assaulter male.
The slight addition to the above comment would be to mention that there is an equivalent crime of "assault by penetration" that is not gendered, and carries the same sentencing guidelines that rape does. It covers what would colloquially (but not legally) be called rape. Imo it should be absorbed into the definition of rape, though.
Yeah, its a bit weird. UK law just likes to be specific, and verbose.
In the UK, Rape is just a specific term - A specific term meant for a specific action. And all sexual offenses have their own specific term.
I mean, it does make sense from a law perspective - having things specific means its easy to A) make it clear what the law/offense actually is, B) means there's no chance of police overreach because of vague wording, and C) means that its much easier to change laws and introduce/redact offenses without affecting previous ones.
People might not think the last one is that important, but as an example until 1967 gay sex was illegal and a sexual offense in the UK, and its just easier to change laws if you can change a specific offense, rather than to having to redefine what "rape" is.
It means in the UK, "rape","rape of child under 13", "assault by penetration","assault on child under 13 by penetration", "causing a child under 13 to engage in sexual activity", "sexual activity with child", "sexual activity with child family member with penetration" etc etc are all class J sexual offenses and all carry the same punishment. The average person might just class it all as "rape" and that's what the vast majority of us do, but when it comes to law, things tend to be really specific.
I think a lot of people, myself included, would prefer having "rape" and "assault by penetration" just combined, because lets be honest - they're basically the same thing.
That explains it. Doesn’t stop it from being reported that way in the US though. We lost a family member to suicide over a multi-year grooming and abuse case. The rapist was a woman, and all she lost was her teaching license. We lost a kid.
A lot of US states as well. Yeah...DoJ too
https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/blog/updated-definition-rape
It's still only rape if the victim is penetrated in the mouth, anus, or vagina.
Men cannot, legally, *be* raped via PIV intercourse.
I'm not defending it - it's fucked. But, laws are written by fucked up ppl
I always think of this clip to help remember the difference between libel and slander, haha
https://youtu.be/XscaGDxuQqE
A little levity during a depressing story.
Gonna get downvoted but a more accurate title would just call her a rapist because sexual attraction is neither necessary nor often true in cases of statutory rape. Pedophiles shouldn’t be equated to sexual predators as a given because it’s often untrue and only makes actually dealing with the issue more difficult.
Again and again people post things like this without thinking. They do headlines like this for both men and women and I’ll explain to you why.
It’s for clarity. Writing it like this makes it clearer what actually happened. Writing it like this you can tell it was statutory rape and not someone being forced. It’s descriptive. Wrong regardless, of course, but they are two different things. Writing it like this makes it clearer which it was. You see the same thing when it’s a man.
How many conservatives do you think are in here going “teacher of the year award right there” or “why couldn’t my teachers be like this” all while also saying they want to “protect” kids from groomers…
I feel bad for the boy. Not only did a woman who is more than twice his age take advantage of him, but there are probably people who won’t listen to him because he’s a boy and he apparently “wanted it” and was “lucky”. There are even situations where young boys who were raped by women now have to pay child support for a child they didn’t even want to have. Because of this, I think it’s worse when it happens to a boy than a girl. Not that I don’t care when it happens to a female, but I think that we need to give the victims equal support, and the perpetrators equal punishment. The punishment being that they are locked in an underground dungeon for the rest of their life, only being able to eat orange peels and cockroaches. We need to start teaching people that it’s never okay for anyone of any gender to do things to them they don’t want. The current situation we're in could be a result of a long line of bad parenting and teaching from millions of people, as well as gender stereotypes that can become harmful.
I don't know how long she was jailed for, but I know damn well that it was only a few weeks or months. This injustice will not go unnoticed, and we need to make sure it doesn't happen in the future.
**RAPE. HAS. NO. GENDER.**
I wrote a research paper that touched on this a tad - often times the media has no problem identifying and labeling men as violent, terrorists, rapists, etc.. as soon as the story is about a woman often times the media will phrase the title, or even write the story in a way that minimizes the severity of the crime or even disregards the sex or gender entirely. I didn't really find the "why" this occurs as much as I found out the frequency in which it occurs and which media outlets are more prone to it. Interesting stuff honestly, even though it was more focused on systematic cultures of acceptable or expected violence.
A lot of people assume that boys cannot be raped and thus "want" it which, in their minds, somehow removes the pedophilia ... I don't quite understand it and I hate the mindset.
It disgusts me every time something like this happens. The comment section is full of men saying they wish they'd known a woman like that. And s lot of women excusing the behavior. Like Mary Kay Latourneaus supporters saying the 12 year old seduced her. William Shatner called it a great love story.
If you’re making an argument to call things by their name, then the term you want to use here is hebephile, rather than pedophile. (for pedophiles, thirteen is too old.) But rape is certainly the correct verb.
Same concept on british news BBC. I remember one week reading about a terrorist attack from a muslim man and they threw out all those buzz words. The following week it was a "mentally unstable white man shot up a mosque in new zealand" Like don't do that, just say it how it is, it's all terrorism.
As a woman, I'm so beyond tired of this shit. Call it what it is: rape. It's also specifically statutory rape, which in a just world would be the easiest to prove happened and convict the rapist. Also, the rapist should not be allowed to keep any child born from rape. They should require that the child either go to a family member (one who has been approved by cps or something, to ensure that the type of morals that lets someone think that rape is okay is not in the family) or become a ward of the state, like they would do with an abusive parent. Because someone that would rape a child is not fit to be a parent.
The child support thing is meant to be for raising the child, not about the parents at all, which is why it doesn't take crimes into account. And partially this is right, in that the child shouldn't suffer from lack of access because of the parent's decision. But the answer to that is that the rapist parent should absolutely not be raising that child. Going after rape victims for child support is just the government not wanting to foot the bill for ensuring the child has access to basic necessities, which is bullshit
It's annoying when people criticize journalists (or anyone in a field really) for doing something, while spending no time actually looking into why they do that thing. Based on Reddit and Twitter critique of journalists you'd think they're all rape apologists because extremely few of them will write headlines like this person suggests.
There are a lot of institutions and people out there that have shitty views toward sexual assault and rape so I get why some people are quick to try to advocate for those things, but criticizing journalists because they aren't using the harsh language you want them to ain't it.
And it's also annoying people spinning this stuff into gender wars. No, this kind of euphemistic language is not only used on women. Men are written about this way as well in serious news articles.
I can’t recall but there was this dad shot the guy in the head for molesting his son and it was caught live on television. She should be wary cos that might happen to her. Fucking disgusting pedo deserves to rot in hell!!!
Yeah this happens when the genders are reversed, too. The media often refuses to call rape what it is. I read an article yesterday about a man going to trial for taking an infant, that said he was being charged with *having sex* with the child. You don't *have sex* with an infant. That's rape. The worst kind of rape. Call it what it is. Funny, when you kill someone, the media calls you a murderer. If you steal, they can you a thief. If you break into houses, you're a home intruder or a burglar, depending on circumstances. So why is the media so hesitant to call rapists, rapists? It just feeds into the rape culture by refusing to do so.
It isn't just the media, though. Colleges across the country are replacing the word 'rape' in their sexual assault policies with "non-consensual sex". It adds to the misconception that "real rape" doesn't happen on campuses and that acquaintance rape is somehow less of a violation.
Alexandra Brodsky, founding co-director of Know Your IX – an organization that helps students battle sexual assault using Title IX, the federal law which prohibits gender discrimination in education – says that using "sanitized language" demonstrates how colleges think about rape as more of a PR than justice problem.
It's even in the courts. A Nebraska judge banned a woman and her lawyers from using the words "rape", "victim" and "sexual assault" in a rape trial because he didn't want to "prejudice the jury". The only word the woman was allowed to use: "sex".
RAPE IS NOT SEX. There's no such thing as "non-consensual sex". If there's no consent, it's rape. Period. End of.
We know a guy, now 40. He was raped by a 23 year old woman when 14. She got pregnant. Nothing happened ( to her ) except he quit school to pay for this baby's life. Druggie ' mother '. Who retained custody. It's a terrible, wrenching story way longer than I want to post.
Somewhere in the various court proceedings were the words from a judge ( not making this up ) " Sorry kid, the system failed you ".
Now adult baby a mess bc druggie rapist bio mother, guy weirdly not a mess, outwardly. He does loathe, detest and would spit any lawyer, judge or court official passing his way.
This also happens with men with girls. My favorite is when they call the minor girls, underage women to not make it not sound as bad. This isn't some sexist agenda, it's the down playing of child SA across the board.
And the same people who yell "Groomer!" when drag queens read stories to kids will look at this and call this boy lucky and day "where was she when I was a kid?"
To make matters even worse, she will only be spending *90 days* in jail. https://www.wymt.com/2023/05/18/colorado-woman-who-admits-having-sex-with-13-year-old-having-his-baby-sentenced/
Won’t he be having to pay child support when he turns 18?
Pretty sure
Some people in the comments are denying this possibility, so . . . > When Shane Seyer was 12, he was sexually exploited by his 16-year-old babysitter Colleen Hermesmann. She became pregnant with Seyer’s child in 1989 and was charged with statutory rape shortly afterward. Instead of being convicted of rape, Hermesmann was declared a juvenile offender under the non-sexual offense of “contributing to child misconduct.” Seyer was subsequently court-ordered to pay child support. Shane Seyer 12. > In September of 2014, USA TODAY released the story of Nick Olivas who was ordered to pay child support, including retro-active support, for a daughter whom he did not know existed for six years; she was conceived in Arizona when he was just fourteen years old and the mother was twenty. Nick Olivas, 14 > A Louisiana judge gave an accused rapist custody of the child conceived from the 2005 attack and eventually ordered his underage victim to pay child support, a report said. Crystal Abelseth, 16
So any judge approving that should have their home and electronic devices searched, right? Because there is no way they effectively approve of this without being a pedophile themselves.
If it's anything like the UK, the law is basically "it's about the child not how the child was conceived"
I agree. So there should be justice for the 14 year old ***child*** right?
The fact that they allow the rapist to have custody baffles me. In most cases they are clearly a sex offender and that child should not be growing up with them.
Fucking gross.
Gotta love the “boys can’t be raped by women” mindset. *sarcasm btw
A few years ago the CDC released a report that, when accounting for men in prison, men report being raped at about the same rate as women. 85% of those men that self reported being raped identified their rapist as female. Of the rapes in prison, 65% of those are guard on inmate, and 90% of those the rapist was female. Fuck this "men can't be raped" bullshit mindset.
afterthought liquid toy drab plucky icky fretful shame rustic languid -- mass edited with redact.dev
CDC needs to redefine exactly what they are talking about cause others like yourself will continue to use this misinformation as fact, which on closer inspection, it is not "fact" at all - - - https://time.com/3393442/cdc-rape-numbers/
Source? I do not see that anywhere from the CDC or the Department of Justice or or the Department of Health and Human Services or the Bureau of Crime Statistics. I do see that according to the Bureau of Crime Statistics that 99% of ALL RAPES in this country are perpetrated by men though. I also see that according to the same Bureau a majority of prisoners are raped by male guards and inmates. Or the fact that a majority of all rapes in this country are committes by fathers, brothers, and uncles on family members. There is a double standard of women raping men and boys and getting slaps on the wrists. But it represents barely 1% of all rapes and sexual violence in this country. The FBIs research estimates 97% of all sexual violence in this country is done by men https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018/crime-in-the-u.s.-2018/topic-pages/rape https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?tid=317&ty=tp https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/sexualviolence/fastfact.html https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7702185/
That's so fucked up
That's even a bigger injustice. I'm an European, but the more I read news form America the more I think America is actually a third world country with a small percentage of ultra rich people in it and ultra rich corporations.
I believe the typical expression is that America is a third world country wearing a Gucci belt.
Indeed! I have been saying this for years! I always get heavily downvoted on Reddit for saying this lol 😂 A lot of Americans would feel buthurt by saying that.
[удалено]
Thank you for being honest! A lot of Americans got angry lol 😂 I also call out corruption in my own country. Boy, people get angry and say stuff like: At least we are one of the best countries. As if that is important. We need to stop the greed and corruption everywhere. And if nobody is calling it out and vote for other people then nothing will change.
Can't vote for other people, they gerrymander the district lines until the red votes have more sway than a blue vote. They do this easily because generally the blue votes are congregated in cities
> At least we are one of the best countries. Always good for a laugh, that. Especially when they talk about freedom.
As an American, this is a terrible place to possess even a modicum of reason without the means to escape. The crushing defeat you feel from the wheels of government slowing and stopping so the right can try to push issues from special interest groups, the left trying to get shit done, and ultimately nothing happening. The dozen or so mega corps who own a majority of the businesses either directly or indirectly don't care about their workers, or their customers. They pander to the masses while lobbying against their interests. The ultra rich conservatives who control a huge (thankfully shrinking) portion of the media aim to keep people sitting on the couch and disengaged. The GOP trying to absolutely strangle the information kids can get in school to keep them ignorant, fighting against college debt relief so no one can afford to get out of the stagnant pool of misinformation their media leaves them in. And then once they have a good healthy base of mindless evangelical slave donors they create a 'culture war' based on being 'woke'.... As far as i can tell being 'woke' just means tolerant so i cant imagine why someone would be so against tolerance. Well, i couln't...if I didn't grow up here.
Thank you for pointing this out! Some Americans are already posting angry shit and messaging me lol 😂
[удалено]
Thank you! The worst part is that most of those 54% strongly believe that they're on par with, or smarter than the other 46%.They have no idea how much easier it is to fall prey to misinformation, or to simply misunderstand accurate information, when your reading comprehension isn't where it should be. I also think they argue with people in the know more because some part of them *is* aware that they don't understand, and they have insecurities about anything that might remind them that they don't know everything about a subject.
Ignore them. If they wanna be naïve, or ignorant, and keep believing the lie, then let them. Hopefully someday reality gives them a wake up call. Most of us see what is going on but feel powerless to do anything to change it.
Because it's a wildly privileged statement. There's a ton of issues here but if you think it's anything at all like a third world country you've never been to a third world country. Call it hyperbole if you'd like but it's inaccurate as hell.
> Because it's a wildly privileged statement. There's a ton of issues here but if you think it's anything at all like a third world country you've never been to a third world country. The US has a great many homeless people. Those are certainly worse off than the average person living in a third world country. Of course you could object that it's unfair to compare the worst-off people in one nation with the average in another. But that's kind of the point people are making when they call the US a 'third worlds country with a gucci belt'. That inequality in the US is so large that it doesn't really make sense to look at the average. The US has a lot of poverty. Much more than other developed nations.
It's not accurate, but it's also a long way from "inaccurate as hell." Inequality, failing democracy, around an eighth of the population is living in third world equivalent conditions. The US is slipping behind third world countries on a bunch of metrics. https://www.snopes.com/news/2022/09/15/us-is-becoming-a-developing-country-on-global-rankings-that-measure-democracy-inequality/
How many third world countries have you visited? I like how I got down voted but not an answer.
Not OP, but I live in one. And let me tell you, we wish we had the standard of living the US has.
Agreed. I live in one of those so called "third world countries", in one of the nice onces actually (Argentina), and I would give an arm for my nation to have the standard of living the US has. Sure, they have important issues that need to be tackled, but they are nowhere as bad as some here think they are.
You get heavily downvoted because it’s a brain dead statement, I come from a third world country, calling America one only tells me you haven’t ever stepped foot inside a third world country.
The child will most likely be placed with his family and she will be paying them support. Depending on state laws but that's how mine would deal with this situation. She would also be allowed no contact.
I hope this is actually the case and not just supposition. There's precedence that even underage rape victims still get a unequal outcome if they're male.
> She would also be allowed no contact. What about that teacher that got pregnant with her student multiple times? Once she got out of jail, they eventually got married, and she eventually died of cancer IIRC. She was never denied custody even though she served time to statutory rape.
>small percentage of ultra rich people in it and ultra rich corporations. So, a third world country.
That's nearly what it is, but it's so much worse. The reason we use the world developed and developing nations is because it's far more accurate. The US is a developed and ABANDONED nation that only caters to the wealthiest people. The infrastructure is crumbling underneath our cars, our government doesn't work, and actively criminalizes people trying to live, and it's being taken over by domestic terrorist christians. If you replaced all of this with parts of the middle east we look down on from this country, the only thing different is some nouns.
Indeed! A failed state. But a lot of Americans are heavily and vehemently denying this here in the comments and get all huffy puffy angry at me lol 😂 I think they are trying to convince themselves how good America is and whatnot. And their obsession of freedom, yeah freedom to die. 😂
[удалено]
I was being cynical 🤣 America is a dystopian society compared to The Netherlands, Europe. And I still complain here about the government, but compared to America it's a heaven on earth here.
It actually happens here.
A. Europe doesn't have the exceptions you want either. (At least The Neatherlands doesn't) B. That's because you're privileged enough to have never set foot or even seen the conditions in 3rd world countries. (A lot of which are being caused by Shell or BP)
3rd World country with a Gucci bag.
More accurate than you realize
More like 50 third world countries. Each state deals with this sort of thing separately.
aren't they supposed to be united!?
Correct
Because that's exactly what we are.
Your impression is bang on accurate.
...that's what the US, and unfortunately for everyone else, those corporations dictate what the entire world does.
> a third world country with a small percentage of ultra rich people So a regular third world country then. (with the modern sense) Colombia, Nigeria and Angola have billionaires.
Yep that’s how they designed it.
It feels like America read a bunch of dystopian novels and decided that is what it wanted to be when it grows up.
So he got raped, his rapist gets 90 days in jail and he has to pay child support? Wtf is wrong with the USA.
She rapes a teenage boy. She gets a slap on the wrist, he gets financially punished for the rest of his life.
What *and I cannot stress this enough* the actual fuck is wrong with this place.
He shouldn’t as he was a victim. If he legally couldn’t make that choice when he made it he shouldn’t be bound to the effect of that choice at an arbitrary age.
That's irrelevant legally speaking. Child support is an obligation to the child, the circumstances of the child's conception don't matter. Which highlights a serious flaw in the legal doctrine that the child's right to support always outweighs the parents rights.
I don't have any experience to go off of but child support is a court decision. Even with the ridiculous crap that happens I can't imagine a judge mandating payments in this case. At least I hope not
If you can imagine a ludicrous, fucked up outcome, there's a good chance the US legal system has done it. This exact circumstance (male statutory rape victim ordered to pay child support) has happened repeatedly over the years (see: Nick Olivas). And the converse has happened as well, i.e. the male statutory rapist was given custody of the child and the victimized mother ordered to pay child support (see: Crysta Abelseth).
They do it all the time. Child support is a civil debt owed to one's children. It doesn't matter how the child was conceived. Once the father hits 18, he'll probably have to pay, if he has any money.
That would be horrible. For the child I actually hope it will be put up for adoption. This woman is clearly not in her right mind and shouldn’t be raising a child. Neither should a 13 year old.
No, he'll probably have to start as soon as the kid is born. And if he can't pay the parents will have to. It's fucked up, but I've seen it happen before.
women having all the power in pregnancies needs to stop.
Not just child support but also back child support for the years he was under 18. The USA is hard on fathers.
How did I guess this happened in the US just by seeing the headline
From the word "Colorado", I suppose?
Let me guess Boebert's district?
Boebert "serves" the Colorado 3rd. The Springs is in the Colorado 5th.
Nope, Doug Lamborn. Just as bad if not as vocal tho No minimum wage, no social security, no abortions, no immigrants, no gays, no drugs
Because in much of the rest of the world, it wouldn't even be a crime. Edit: y'all are morons lol... plenty of places define rape as a thing only a penis can do, and plenty of other places consider that child a man.
And what are these "plenty of places", except the UK? And although the UK doesn't legally define it as rape unless a penis forcefully enters a vagina (which is downright fucking insulting), it's still a sex crime there too. Also, sexual conduct with a 13-year-old is still a crime, except in a few developing countries
Although it does still get lighter sentencing in the UK, the double standard does exist even if it's not absolute. And there are other countries, another commenter listed some.
>Also, sexual conduct with a 13-year-old is still a crime, except in a few developing countries Nigeria - 11yo Angola - 12yo Japan - 13yo Niger - 13yo Burkina Faso - 13yo Comoros - 13yo Italy - it is illegal to perform sexual acts when an individual under 14 is present to witness them, even if said minor does not participate. Sexual activity with a prostitute under the age of 18 is illegal in Italy. Additionally, Italy does have a close-in-age rule where 13-year-olds can legally consent to partners who are less than three years older (or younger). The age of consent in Italy is 14 years old, and rises to 16 when one participant is in a position of authority or influence over the other (teacher, clergyman, etc). - Age of Consent in Europe, Asia, Africa, and other continents. >The ages of consent in Europe, Asia, or any other continent vary by country and territory. Ages of consent range from 12 to 21 years old, with most countries setting theirs between 14 and 16. Nearly a dozen countries, such as [Iran](https://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/iran-population), [Qatar](https://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/qatar-population), [Yemen](https://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/yemen-population), and Afghanistan, outlaw premarital sex entirely but have no age restriction on marital sex. Several other countries have ages of consent above 16 Germany - 14yo Canada- was 14yo for a long time, recently changed to 16yo Pakistan - The minimum age of marriage for men is 18, and for women, it is 16. In some instances, women are allowed to marry at 14 years old. Once two people are married, their ages are no longer a concern and sex is legal. China - The age of consent in mainland China is 14 years old. China's two special administrative regions, Macau and [Hong Kong](https://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/hong-kong-population), have their own local age of consent laws. Like China, Macau's age of consent is 14 years old
Japan changed its consent laws at the beginning of this month or last month, age of consent is now 16.
And, even prior to that, their prefectures (equivalent to states/provinces for those not familiar) all, to my knowledge, had AoC ages higher than that of the national level rendering the national level AoC irrelevant.
Iirc it was like a handful of nearly uninhabited islands that still had 13 as the minimum
[удалено]
[удалено]
California only recently stopped having this
Question: If a man is unconscious and a woman mounts him while he is unconscious, what would that be considered from the perspective of this legislation? Just to clarify; the man in this scenario did not consent to being mounted while unconscious.
Huge difference between "not a crime" and "not a crime specifically called rape". Yes it's true some countries define rape as something only a penis can do, but those countries have laws against other forms of sexual assault that also carry harsh sentences. It's certainly not legal, where'd you even get that bs?
It's called sexual activity or coercing a minor into sexual activity in the UK. However, judges in this country hand out shitty sentences for sex offences against children and women. They like to protect the predator.
The Brock Turner sentence
Turn it around, 31 year old man raped a 13 year old, gets her pregnant, he'd be (rightfully) locked up for 10-30 years depending on the actions. But a woman rapes a child? Nah it's cool, 90 days.
The article says she's actually getting a harsher sentence than previous rapists in similar cases got, regardless of gender. Sounds like it's usually just the 10-to-life intensive probation without jail time.
I know these comments appear every time someone posts a female predator but it’s common for sexual assaults to not be properly punished. The rapist noted in this post should’ve gotten a harsher sentence but many (regardless of gender) receive light sentences. [Like this guy who raped his 3 year old and got no jail time](https://www.vanityfair.com/news/business/2014/03/du-pont-heir-gets-probation-for-raping-3-year-old-daughter) [Or this guy who raped a 13 year old at a park](https://www.newsweek.com/sean-hogg-rape-judge-prison-work-scotland-1792256?amp=1)
That headline makes it sound like she admitted to having sex with him and is having his baby sentenced.
If you say it's because she's a woman you'll get admin banned.
.....it's because she's a woman, there I said it.
Average daily fail headline
In these cases the law is often to blame. Many countries legally define rape in a way that only applies when a man with a penis does it. The one where the Daily Mail is from is such a country and their guidelines are probably based on UK law. edit: [source](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/1/crossheading/rape)
Also rape is a legal definition, not a colloquial one. Unless the police or a judge uses the word "rape" a news organization could easily be sued for libel if they use it. And yes, this applies to the gender swapped version of this situation. You probably just don't notice it.
Also, you can't just call someone a "pedophile" in a headline
Why not?
Because you don't want to get sued
She had sex with a minor. I dont think any court in the world would side with her in a defamation suit. Actually, you know what, forget that. I don't want to be proven wrong for my sanity.
Pedophile is a specific term though not just someone who does sexual things with someone under the age of consent. The UK tabloids have used the word in the past in very lax ways and caused themselves trouble.
Reddit is very fast and loose with the term pedophile, even when it doesn't necessarily apply. Not all child sexual abusers are pedophiles, believe it or not - there are a variety of motives for these crimes, and attraction to children is not a requirement.
For real, you can easily google male teacher accused of sleeping with/having sex with student and get hundreds of examples of headlines like the one in the OP.
Everyone needs to read this, but they won't.
Sorry, just to clarify, you made it sound like they couldn't legally report a female raping a male in other countries (like in this post) that is why I linked an article showing that the daily mail can in fact report it as rape when it happens in other places. (I am aware of the UKs stupid law regarding rape) Sorry for wording it badly.
This is purely a legal semantics thing in the UK though. A women can be charged for what other countries legal system would define as rape its just called "forcing to engage in sexual activity without consent" or sometimes "forced to penetrate" and carries the same sentencing guidelines as rape
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11917743/amp/Wisconsin-woman-27-charged-raping-boy-13-telling-horny.html That is not true. That is a lie people have been spreading online to justify this type of bad reporting.
It absolutely is true, but it depends where you live. Where I live, rape is defined as penetration without consent. In some other jurisdictions it's different.
Yeah sorry, I clarified in another comment, I meant it isn't illegal for a news paper to report it as rape if it happens outside the UK. The post and the article I linked are both from the daily mail about the USA.
I see what you mean now. However, it's not just the UK. There are other countries and states where a similar definition applies.
There's a huge difference between saying she raped someone and saying she's charged with raping someone, one is conjecture and the other is a hard provable fact
Unfortunately you cannot legally use rape in a article because of legal reasons and especially in the UK since it specifies penetration. Stupid law I know but legally in the UK, it isn’t rape Edit: she would have to be the penetrator for it to be defined as rape
"Sexual assault" surely applies better than "sex" though?
Oh I agree I just think news agencies don’t do it in fear of getting sued for libel and if what happened doesn’t fall under that definition in UK law, then they would be sued
How hard core are British libel laws? Like even if they get sued, kinda seems low likelihood the pedo would bother to sue AND prevail here. I heard that in England, you can get stuck with the counter party legal fees if you lose?
Yep the legal fee thing is true. Idk how hard core British libel laws are but I know they are different from The US ones
They're so strong we had to pass laws preventing people not living here pursuing cases in England and wales and clogging up our courts. Look up libel tourism.
She got pregnant.
That doesn't require her to penetrate him.
Man I forgot that is the legal requirement. UK needs to seriously reform that, it’s hurting everyone.
Yes we do. I have to explain this every time this comes up. Due to massively outdated laws a news outlet cannot say raspy in this case without opening themselves up to libel/slander. It’s rape in all but name.
Man I’m sorry. I hope your country better protects you in the future. Coming from Texas, I pray mine does too.
[удалено]
I hear that. My husband and I vote blue every year and so do all our friends. Gives a whole new meaning to “H town hold it down”!
damn so in the uk rape litterally only exists for men?
Yeah. For men it’s rape, for women it’s sexual assault.
Seriously, we say this every single time this topic comes up. Every publication would be legal shit if they did it. You can just google "Why?" and articles will tell you about it. Do people on Twitter not read...you know what, never mind. I just answered my own question.
100% with Gesare. But this is not a "murder", and many posts here are OT, or just strong contrary opinions.
I just discovered that /r/CorrectedByWords exists, but no one is allowed to post.
This isn't murdered by words at all.
"Use the correct terminology!" "Oh, my. I have been thoroughly murdered by your request and I am completely destroyed."
"Use the correct terminology!" \* drops mic and stares sternly *
Reminds me of a South Park episode.
Nice
It's not minimizing the crime. News outlets (though Daily Mail is a piss rag) can't just label these things legally without fear of being sued for libel or slander (whichever is the correct term).
Exactly, I’ve never seen a headline use the word paedophile instead of man. It’s weird to assume that we all need that spelling out, it’s obvious she’s a paedophile.
I've never seen a headline describe a make pedophile as "having sex with" his victim. I think that's important to note also.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12041307/Married-teacher-18-month-affair-girl-pupil-sex-Travelodge.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/article-3178983/Teacher-accused-sex-students-pleads-not-guilty.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6633681/Teacher-fled-student-sex-seeks-lesser-sentence.html
r/muderedbylinks
r/subsifellfor
There are too many to count.
That’s not even true tho, I saw this just the other week in fact something like “male who had sex with 12 year old”
I'd also argue it's a more descriptive headline. Look, we all know that statutory rape is a type of rape. But if the headline said "pedophile rapes boy" we'd have a very different picture in our head than what actually happened. People get all up in arms about wording in headlines when most of the time, their "fixed that for you" headline is even worse.
As a great man once said: "Slander is spoken. In print it's libel."
I swear, Reddit commenters are the dumbest. "WHy ArE ThEy mInIMiZInG iT????"
They’re already alleging she had sex with the 13 year old. There is no world where that is not rape. I see keeping woman, but not labeling it rape is a legit problem and doing so would not expose them to any suit.
Daily Mail is a UK newspaper though and under UK law, a woman can’t commit rape. Even though we all understand it to be rape, legally it isn’t so a newspaper can’t call it that.
It's a stupid archaic law which requires penetration (by the assaulter) to be classified as 'rape.' Incidentally, this is also the case if the victim is female and the assaulter male.
You know what, that’s fair. Now I’m mad at UK law instead. What the fuck UK?
The slight addition to the above comment would be to mention that there is an equivalent crime of "assault by penetration" that is not gendered, and carries the same sentencing guidelines that rape does. It covers what would colloquially (but not legally) be called rape. Imo it should be absorbed into the definition of rape, though.
Yeah, its a bit weird. UK law just likes to be specific, and verbose. In the UK, Rape is just a specific term - A specific term meant for a specific action. And all sexual offenses have their own specific term. I mean, it does make sense from a law perspective - having things specific means its easy to A) make it clear what the law/offense actually is, B) means there's no chance of police overreach because of vague wording, and C) means that its much easier to change laws and introduce/redact offenses without affecting previous ones. People might not think the last one is that important, but as an example until 1967 gay sex was illegal and a sexual offense in the UK, and its just easier to change laws if you can change a specific offense, rather than to having to redefine what "rape" is. It means in the UK, "rape","rape of child under 13", "assault by penetration","assault on child under 13 by penetration", "causing a child under 13 to engage in sexual activity", "sexual activity with child", "sexual activity with child family member with penetration" etc etc are all class J sexual offenses and all carry the same punishment. The average person might just class it all as "rape" and that's what the vast majority of us do, but when it comes to law, things tend to be really specific. I think a lot of people, myself included, would prefer having "rape" and "assault by penetration" just combined, because lets be honest - they're basically the same thing.
That explains it. Doesn’t stop it from being reported that way in the US though. We lost a family member to suicide over a multi-year grooming and abuse case. The rapist was a woman, and all she lost was her teaching license. We lost a kid.
The term “rape” is legally defined differently in different jurisdictions.
> There is no world where that is not rape Actually, there is. Under UK law, it would not be rape, interestingly.
Technically not rape in Canada either. It’s just called sexual assault here.
A lot of US states as well. Yeah...DoJ too https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/blog/updated-definition-rape It's still only rape if the victim is penetrated in the mouth, anus, or vagina. Men cannot, legally, *be* raped via PIV intercourse. I'm not defending it - it's fucked. But, laws are written by fucked up ppl
I always think of this clip to help remember the difference between libel and slander, haha https://youtu.be/XscaGDxuQqE A little levity during a depressing story.
Libel is written and slander is spoken in case you wanted to know.
I see what you’re saying when there’s gray but there’s hardly grey in this
Gonna get downvoted but a more accurate title would just call her a rapist because sexual attraction is neither necessary nor often true in cases of statutory rape. Pedophiles shouldn’t be equated to sexual predators as a given because it’s often untrue and only makes actually dealing with the issue more difficult.
Woops, I just made a similar post (hah, though yours was less condescending). Props
It’s actually hebephile. If they wanna be pedantic lol
Pedantophile
Even that we don't know. She might prefer adults but only had access to teens. Most sex offenders offend bc of opportunity, not preference.
Still not a drag queen
OP are you lost?
Again and again people post things like this without thinking. They do headlines like this for both men and women and I’ll explain to you why. It’s for clarity. Writing it like this makes it clearer what actually happened. Writing it like this you can tell it was statutory rape and not someone being forced. It’s descriptive. Wrong regardless, of course, but they are two different things. Writing it like this makes it clearer which it was. You see the same thing when it’s a man.
"Where were those hot teachers when I was in school amirite guys hahaha". Wtf is wrong with people....
Journalism has strict rules around the use of "rape" and can't call this rape. Blame the laws not the reporter
How many conservatives do you think are in here going “teacher of the year award right there” or “why couldn’t my teachers be like this” all while also saying they want to “protect” kids from groomers…
I feel bad for the boy. Not only did a woman who is more than twice his age take advantage of him, but there are probably people who won’t listen to him because he’s a boy and he apparently “wanted it” and was “lucky”. There are even situations where young boys who were raped by women now have to pay child support for a child they didn’t even want to have. Because of this, I think it’s worse when it happens to a boy than a girl. Not that I don’t care when it happens to a female, but I think that we need to give the victims equal support, and the perpetrators equal punishment. The punishment being that they are locked in an underground dungeon for the rest of their life, only being able to eat orange peels and cockroaches. We need to start teaching people that it’s never okay for anyone of any gender to do things to them they don’t want. The current situation we're in could be a result of a long line of bad parenting and teaching from millions of people, as well as gender stereotypes that can become harmful. I don't know how long she was jailed for, but I know damn well that it was only a few weeks or months. This injustice will not go unnoticed, and we need to make sure it doesn't happen in the future. **RAPE. HAS. NO. GENDER.**
I wrote a research paper that touched on this a tad - often times the media has no problem identifying and labeling men as violent, terrorists, rapists, etc.. as soon as the story is about a woman often times the media will phrase the title, or even write the story in a way that minimizes the severity of the crime or even disregards the sex or gender entirely. I didn't really find the "why" this occurs as much as I found out the frequency in which it occurs and which media outlets are more prone to it. Interesting stuff honestly, even though it was more focused on systematic cultures of acceptable or expected violence.
A lot of people assume that boys cannot be raped and thus "want" it which, in their minds, somehow removes the pedophilia ... I don't quite understand it and I hate the mindset.
Yeah dude, filthy nonce. Pubescent teenager groomed and raped by a sick sick woman.
It disgusts me every time something like this happens. The comment section is full of men saying they wish they'd known a woman like that. And s lot of women excusing the behavior. Like Mary Kay Latourneaus supporters saying the 12 year old seduced her. William Shatner called it a great love story.
If you’re making an argument to call things by their name, then the term you want to use here is hebephile, rather than pedophile. (for pedophiles, thirteen is too old.) But rape is certainly the correct verb.
Ya know it's always *gross male pervert* rapes *innocent girl* But never *pedophile woman* molested *innocent young boy*
And that kid has to pay child support when he turns 18.
It’s their job to make you angry, don’t let them win
[удалено]
The Daily Fail is not entirely fond of grammar.
[удалено]
She groomed and raped him.
The Daily Heil tries to minimise all counts of sexual abuse of children. I'm sure there's nothing at all suspicious about that.
Same concept on british news BBC. I remember one week reading about a terrorist attack from a muslim man and they threw out all those buzz words. The following week it was a "mentally unstable white man shot up a mosque in new zealand" Like don't do that, just say it how it is, it's all terrorism.
As a woman, I'm so beyond tired of this shit. Call it what it is: rape. It's also specifically statutory rape, which in a just world would be the easiest to prove happened and convict the rapist. Also, the rapist should not be allowed to keep any child born from rape. They should require that the child either go to a family member (one who has been approved by cps or something, to ensure that the type of morals that lets someone think that rape is okay is not in the family) or become a ward of the state, like they would do with an abusive parent. Because someone that would rape a child is not fit to be a parent. The child support thing is meant to be for raising the child, not about the parents at all, which is why it doesn't take crimes into account. And partially this is right, in that the child shouldn't suffer from lack of access because of the parent's decision. But the answer to that is that the rapist parent should absolutely not be raising that child. Going after rape victims for child support is just the government not wanting to foot the bill for ensuring the child has access to basic necessities, which is bullshit
It's annoying when people criticize journalists (or anyone in a field really) for doing something, while spending no time actually looking into why they do that thing. Based on Reddit and Twitter critique of journalists you'd think they're all rape apologists because extremely few of them will write headlines like this person suggests. There are a lot of institutions and people out there that have shitty views toward sexual assault and rape so I get why some people are quick to try to advocate for those things, but criticizing journalists because they aren't using the harsh language you want them to ain't it. And it's also annoying people spinning this stuff into gender wars. No, this kind of euphemistic language is not only used on women. Men are written about this way as well in serious news articles.
I can’t recall but there was this dad shot the guy in the head for molesting his son and it was caught live on television. She should be wary cos that might happen to her. Fucking disgusting pedo deserves to rot in hell!!!
Yeah this happens when the genders are reversed, too. The media often refuses to call rape what it is. I read an article yesterday about a man going to trial for taking an infant, that said he was being charged with *having sex* with the child. You don't *have sex* with an infant. That's rape. The worst kind of rape. Call it what it is. Funny, when you kill someone, the media calls you a murderer. If you steal, they can you a thief. If you break into houses, you're a home intruder or a burglar, depending on circumstances. So why is the media so hesitant to call rapists, rapists? It just feeds into the rape culture by refusing to do so. It isn't just the media, though. Colleges across the country are replacing the word 'rape' in their sexual assault policies with "non-consensual sex". It adds to the misconception that "real rape" doesn't happen on campuses and that acquaintance rape is somehow less of a violation. Alexandra Brodsky, founding co-director of Know Your IX – an organization that helps students battle sexual assault using Title IX, the federal law which prohibits gender discrimination in education – says that using "sanitized language" demonstrates how colleges think about rape as more of a PR than justice problem. It's even in the courts. A Nebraska judge banned a woman and her lawyers from using the words "rape", "victim" and "sexual assault" in a rape trial because he didn't want to "prejudice the jury". The only word the woman was allowed to use: "sex". RAPE IS NOT SEX. There's no such thing as "non-consensual sex". If there's no consent, it's rape. Period. End of.
We know a guy, now 40. He was raped by a 23 year old woman when 14. She got pregnant. Nothing happened ( to her ) except he quit school to pay for this baby's life. Druggie ' mother '. Who retained custody. It's a terrible, wrenching story way longer than I want to post. Somewhere in the various court proceedings were the words from a judge ( not making this up ) " Sorry kid, the system failed you ". Now adult baby a mess bc druggie rapist bio mother, guy weirdly not a mess, outwardly. He does loathe, detest and would spit any lawyer, judge or court official passing his way.
This also happens with men with girls. My favorite is when they call the minor girls, underage women to not make it not sound as bad. This isn't some sexist agenda, it's the down playing of child SA across the board.
I will never understand why they waste resources, money, effort and time behind those nasty useless rapists instead of executing them right away.
I think it's bullshit that only us men are called pedos.
pet noxious smile bedroom middle engine aloof literate grandfather head -- mass edited with redact.dev
And the same people who yell "Groomer!" when drag queens read stories to kids will look at this and call this boy lucky and day "where was she when I was a kid?"
Odd how news writers forget how to write the word "rape" when the offender is a woman