Unfair-----your opinion

With regard to all the arguments that are being tossed about at the moment concerning young men,boys even, who are being put on the sex-offenders register. How come the argument is so one sided and blatantly sexist as I haven't heard one case of the female participant being put on the sex offenders register
Example, Both 15 still at school the girl gets pregnant and he gets put on the sex offenders list.
Surely it takes two to tango and we hear enough about how girls are more mature, both
physically and mentally than males of equivalent age. So why is the female who was a
willing participant,let off and the male persecuted
Example, 18 year old male at a night club gets a nearly16 year old girl in trouble,having been told that it is a over 18 club,same result it is him who is in bother

Please do not get the wrong end of the stick,I do not advocate sex by the under 16's and as a child of the 60's that's a hypocritical statement but I do think when both parties are willing and under age it is a sin that only one gets persecuted

I appreciate that the law is to protect juveniles and when the age gap is obvious it is a very serious offence and blatant pedophiles deserve all they get,but some people are being wrongly branded sex offenders

Hm... You state a good case there. Never really thought about it, though when my older sis got pregnant by her boyfriend (way back when she was 15 and he was 16) he didn't get put on the sex offenders list because my parents (and my sister) didn't prosecute.

I'm thinking it's another example of common sense thrown out the window. Within reason it shouldn't happen at all... not when it's a couple of stupid kids at least.

On the other hand, boys are thought to be much more devious in the act of actually getting into a girl's knickers because it gives them status among other boys. Tell a girl a pack of lies about how much they love her, make her think he's 'the one' and bob's your uncle. Onto the next one. Which the law would obviously wish to discourage due to teenage pregnancies, benefits, yadda yadda yadda...

Who knows? Maybe just some outdated law that needs re-vamping?

T.B.H what brought this into my mind was two kids talking in the chippie. They[both female] were both talking about the same boy who kept his socks on in bed and where he was tonight and with whom

Local kids 14-15max but they come from nice appearance wise homes and apparently both been to bed with this local boy------------------------just made me think

Originally Posted by Ping

On the other hand, boys are thought to be much more devious in the act of actually getting into a girl's knickers because it gives them status among other boys. Tell a girl a pack of lies about how much they love her, make her think he's 'the one' and bob's your uncle. Onto the next one. Which the law would obviously wish to discourage due to teenage pregnancies, benefits, yadda yadda yadda...

Possibly the worst argument ever for putting someone on the Sex Offenders List!

The world we live in, its a marvellous place...

its the same reason a woman can't be prosecuted for rape, because the actual definition of rape has to involve (i'm going to sound like a sex education teacher ...maybe because i used to teach it ) "penerative sex" and in order to do that a mans consent is in the fact his trousers suddenly feel awfully tight :P This means he 'obviously' consented, and for when both kids are young the elder is always prosectued, which is most cases is the boyo!

Originally Posted by gettin2dizzy

its the same reason a woman can't be prosecuted for rape, because the actual definition of rape has to involve (i'm going to sound like a sex education teacher ...maybe because i used to teach it ) "penerative sex" and in order to do that a mans consent is in the fact his trousers suddenly feel awfully tight :P This means he 'obviously' consented, and for when both kids are young the elder is always prosectued, which is most cases is the boyo!

Ah, but the man can be drugged to stimulate blood flow to his genital regions, and cause said tent-effect...

I guess this hasnt actualy happened yet, or at least not alot, but its possible..

Matt

Overdose of viagra into said young mans drinks ? along with rohypnol.... could be an unpleasent landing if he falls the wrong way...

Originally Posted by Kinvig

Possibly the worst argument ever for putting someone on the Sex Offenders List!

I'm only throwing around thoughts. I haven't the foggiest about the true reasoning behind it and quite frankly don't really care one way or the other.

Just wouldn't surprise me though if somewhere that was some law-maker's reasoning.

even viagra needs telling what to do though. would be an interesting court case! but thats how the law stands