| , posted
over a year ago
I was thinking about some questions when I read through a thread on the main site about an 11 year old who had sex with a much older man and his co-worker. The thread is here:
http://www.dearcupid.org/question/i-am-11-and-i-had-sex-with.html
On the issue of physical and mental health, I know that a female at that age can get all sorts of problems in being active or even a single engagement in sexual intercourse. Also, in terms of emotional desire, there is a good possibility that the solidity of that girl's needs and wants haven't really quite started yet in terms of going out into the world and learning and experiencing, etc, etc, etc.
So then comes my questions and thoughts:
When does a person stop becoming a victom, and when does a person stop becoming a predator?
This question popped up when I thought of a few scenarios:
A) 12 Year Old Girl + 12 Year Old Boy
Common society will argue and even scold either children that they *SHOULD* stop 'being' adults and continue 'being' children - play with toys, concentrate on school, play tag and do boy things and do girl things. However, putting myself in a complete neutral standpoint - meaning away from the influences of common society, politics, religion, and upbringing, who regulates what 12 years should and should not do?
So a 12 Year Old Boy kisses a 12 Year Old Girl, and then proceeds to play doctor after school. They experiment on their sexuality possibly unaware of what it means in their 'unrefined' form.
Perspective: Are they both doing that together with mutual consent, or is one of them the initiator and the other the 'victim'?
Fact: At this day and age, I know more 10 to 14 year olds that engage in some form of intimacy like kissing and groping, than when I was in my senior years at high school.
B) 12 Year Old Girl + 17 Year Old Boy
According to common society, the 17 year old boy's mental development should have exceeded in rapid growth from the time he was around 12 and 13. Generalizing here mind you. He is already thinking about personal interests and possibly even furthering his education in an university, college, or post-sec institution of sorts. However, he might still retain fresh ideals of sexuality and girls and may still find a younger girl attractive, regardless of his 5 year age difference.
Perspective: Are they both 'in love' with mutual emotions, or is the older boy aware that the 12 year old girl is capable of putting out for his puberty-driven libido, and 'taking advantage' of that 12 year old girl's 'love' for him?
C) Let's take an adult scenario.
A man who is 25 and a woman who is 40 is attracted to each other. Seemingly to other adults, they are both adult-minded and their mentalities are generally through common society's views: "stable". Obviously, through the law, whatever sexual endeavor that initiate, it is their own business.
Perspective: Seemingly, they are both together for purposes of mutual 'agreement'. However, it is also possible that the older woman knows the emotional and mental weaknesses of the younger male and is taking advantage of him that way.
Fact: As much as a teenager may not have a more developed mentality and thought process, it is also accurate to say that an adult whom has lived for over 50 years also may not have a developed mentality and thought process. The possibility of a youth of not having is a given, and the possibility of an adult is not a reasonable excuse of his or her actions regardless.
Factual Example: I know a mid 30's woman, very sexual, well educated, and a hard worker, earns tons of money, lives in a nice place, has lots of friends. However, she can easily be taken advantage of by males if she finds herself attracted to their 'sincerity'. She is also very gullible and oddly, naive.
D) Now let's look an extreme case between adult and child.
A 15 year old girl is in an unknown relationship with a 32 year old man. They have not had vaginal nor anal penetration, but they have done everything else. According to varying laws dependent on country and region, even when they haven't committed penetration, the man has already committed 'rape' and would be sentenced to a good 20 years in prison if convicted.
Perspective: According to the law, this man raped the 15 year old girl. Rape by definition means "any act of sexual intercourse or sexual perversion that is forced upon a person". Even if the 15 year old consented it, it is still rape.
People can argue that the girl is too young to understand and that she should wait until her body is more developed and go for someone when she is older. However, by neutral standpoint, who's to say that she didn't understand? Who's to say that the man took advantage of her?
Fact: A few years ago in the Lower Mainland, a man in his late twenties (or was it late 30's?) engaged in a sexual act with a 13 year old girl. He was caught and convicted. Sentencing here is 'light' compared to the U.S. Regardless though, people deemed him as a rapist.
Supposedly, people who knew the man thought he was immature and 'childish', and not educated in terms of post-sec. I don't know what type of job he did, but from the looks of the place he lived at, possibly a minimum-wage job. The news focussed solely on the man, and did not once mention about the girl's own personality and history. So in reality, the story was biased and lopsided.
I can hear Eddie shaking his head at me right now, but I'm trying to understand it in a neutral standpoint.
Fact: The unfortunate fact of today is that girls and boys at the youthful age of barely passed their 10's and 11's, are already 'mimicking' older children and young adults in a way that expresses a sexuality that we as adults of today did not even see when we were younger. In my day as a 10 and 11 year old, my main hobby was building forts with friends with old wooden planks and ropes and nails, and then spraying passing girls with waterguns and loud boos and yells.
However, you ever seen those commercials for Bratz? Yeah, exactly.
So what I am saying here is that through common societal perception, we always see the older 'more mature' man or woman as the predator regardless of the circumstance and regardless of the 'victims' history and own personality.
Best example unrelated to sex are bullies when I was a kid. They were no more than my age, and some less than a year or two from my own. They are simply and utterly mean kids. Mean kids who took pleasure in harming and seeing pain in others. Even kids who picked fights with adults just to show off their own 'power'.
So the question is: When do the supposed 'adult' predators stop being predators, and when do the supposed 'child' boy and girl stop being a victim?
Ever seen a fight between two 16 year old boys? I've seen that, and man was there a LOT of blood and swearing. Over what? A girl and their 'pride'. So is it truly accurate to say that those two 16 year old boys TRULY do not understand what's going on? Is it truly accurate to say that they have absolutely no idea what they are fighting over?
By the time I reached grade 12, I knew at least 20 people whom were having sex on a regular basis. I even walked in on a couple - one giving head to the guy at the Liberian's office during lunch.
You really sure they didn't know what they were doing? Are you really that naive?
Also with the law stating minimal ages for sex. Would you still call a person a pedophile if the law dictated that the minimum age requirement is 22+? It's unreasonable I have to think, but what if that was the case?
In the states, I always see "Wait until you're 18." I remember passing through the Hong Kong airport last year and overhearing a girl tell her friend in Cantonese, "Wait until you're a real woman before having sex." I thought, "What is the age of a real woman?" They both looked to be in their university years.
Posted on 12 October 2007 @ 9:6 (London time) - permalink
(Log in to flag spam/offensive/junk messages to moderators)
|