Patrick Kane: [Updated] D.A. Decides Not to Prosecute; NHL Determines Claims "Unfounded"

[LGR4GM]

Until you consider the second question in my post. Then it's not so irrelevant. 

 

I think a double standard should exist. Men and women are different, they are not equal. Yes he was underaged, she was wrong in that case. But based on a couple of different sources I read about this story it appears his mother found out he was bragging about it which would indicate he wasn't opposed to the idea. It also appears the mother is the one pushing the matter because her baby got taken advantage of. If she forcibly raped him then she should get significant jail time. But I'm getting the impression this isn't what happened. Let the kid testify. 

So you are suggesting a 15yr old boy has attained the mental maturity to understand the consequences of his actions with a woman more than twice his age?

[Neo]

And then there is this:  https://witchwind.wordpress.com/2013/12/15/piv-is-always-rape-ok/   Probably NSFW.

 

I became aware of the "all sex is rape" concept years ago. "Aware" is the correct word. I'm no scholar. Mackinnon, Dworkin, and pop culture came together in many discussions. Their views aren't, in fairness, represented In totality by the "all sex is rape" statement.

 

I try to see it from as many points of view as possible. I can get only to "I'm nuts, or they're nuts" when hearing all sex is rape.

 

Interesting side note: Radical/extreme anything loses me when it's pronouncements become slogans and dogma.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

I think a double standard should exist. Men and women are different, they are not equal. Yes he was underaged, she was wrong in that case. But based on a couple of different sources I read about this story it appears his mother found out he was bragging about it which would indicate he wasn't opposed to the idea. It also appears the mother is the one pushing the matter because her baby got taken advantage of. If she forcibly raped him then she should get significant jail time. But I'm getting the impression this isn't what happened. Let the kid testify. 

 

The problem is that she plead guilty to a lesser charge ... rape in the 4th degree, or some stupid thing ... because she was set to go on trial on more serious charges.

 

Bottom line is ... he was a boy of 15 and, therefore, unable to consent = rape.

 

She got off easy, IMO.

[JJFIVEOH]

I'm not sure why you jumped on me for not responding since I just wasn't on the site for a few hours.

I feel as though the same circumstances should be treated the same as far as legal punishment goes regardless of the genders involved. I do not know this case well enough to say whether the woman should be in jail, but if a male faced jail time for a similar offense then she should as well.

 

That's it. That's all I care to say on the subject.

 

We're you not making this point in response to the questions I asked on the previous page? It appears so, the content is directly related. Nobody jumped on you, stop being a bully. 

[Hank]

So basically you're annoyed he said 1+3=4 rather than 2+2=4.

No.

There is no point in badgering anyone to answer a question.  Noone is obligated to.  If there isn't a greater point you are trying to get to, move on.

Point taken, I'll drop it.

[JJFIVEOH]

So you are suggesting a 15yr old boy has attained the mental maturity to understand the consequences of his actions with a woman more than twice his age?

 

Depends on how you define 'consequences'. 

[Hank]

I'm not sure why you jumped on me for not responding since I just wasn't on the site for a few hours.

I feel as though the same circumstances should be treated the same as far as legal punishment goes regardless of the genders involved. I do not know this case well enough to say whether the woman should be in jail, but if a male faced jail time for a similar offense then she should as well.

That's it. That's all I care to say on the subject.

Thank you, great answer.

[JJFIVEOH]

The problem is that she plead guilty to a lesser charge ... rape in the 4th degree, or some stupid thing ... because she was set to go on trial on more serious charges.

 

Bottom line is ... he was a boy of 15 and, therefore, unable to consent = rape.

 

She got off easy, IMO.

 

Some people aren't mature enough to make decisions about sex when they're 25. The age of consent is an arbitrary number. If he was 15 in a state where the age of consent is 16, does he gain maturity overnight on his birthday? I'll go out on a limb and say he probably enjoyed it and his mother tried to convince him how traumatized he should be. Let the kid testify, if there was no pressure and he didn't oppose the idea, give her a misdemeanor for him being 15. Double standards should exist, we're not the same. 

[Weave]

Some people aren't mature enough to make decisions about sex when they're 25. The age of consent is an arbitrary number. If he was 15 in a state where the age of consent is 16, does he gain maturity overnight on his birthday? I'll go out on a limb and say he probably enjoyed it and his mother tried to convince him how traumatized he should be. Let the kid testify, if there was no pressure and he didn't oppose the idea, give her a misdemeanor for him being 15. Double standards should exist, we're not the same. 

 

 

Of course age of consent is arbitrary.  Most things are to a good point.  He may have wanted to have sex with her, but the law exists because he likely isn't able to determine for himself if he *should*. Statutory rape laws are meant to stop people from taking emotional advantage of children.  Level of victim traumatization is important in sentencing.  It's not important in determining if she was taking advantage of a child.  Of course she was taking advantage of him. taking advantage of someone who very likely isn't capable of determining if he should go through with this.  And that is the point of the law.  Across the board we have chosen to protect minors from their expected poor decision making abilities.  Contracts, alcohol, doctors, work situations, etc.  

 

If anything, the double standard should work the other way as it is pretty well established that typically females mature emotionally earlier than men do.

[LGR4GM]

Well stated Weave.

[JJFIVEOH]

Of course age of consent is arbitrary.  Most things are to a good point.  He may have wanted to have sex with her, but the law exists because he likely isn't able to determine for himself if he *should*. Statutory rape laws are meant to stop people from taking emotional advantage of children.  Level of victim traumatization is important in sentencing.  It's not important in determining if she was taking advantage of a child.  Of course she was taking advantage of him. taking advantage of someone who very likely isn't capable of determining if he should go through with this.  And that is the point of the law.  Across the board we have chosen to protect minors from their expected poor decision making abilities.  Contracts, alcohol, doctors, work situations, etc.  

 

If anything, the double standard should work the other way as it is pretty well established that typically females mature emotionally earlier than men do.

 

Was he traumatized by the situation, or was he traumatized because society told him he was supposed to be traumatized? Of course all ages are arbitrary, but everybody is different. Some can drink responsibly when they're 18, some can't at 40. I think she should get busted for statuatory rape, but I think a jury should decide the level of victimization. I'm not saying underaged males aren't traumatized by having sex with older women (we've all seen the cases of female teachers) what I'm saying is many most likely aren't traumatized. Instead of letting humans grow up to decide for themselves what is best for them, society has increasingly felt the need to tell them the situations in which they should be traumatized. She broke the law, she should get punished. But (solely based on reports) it appears she didn't do anything agressively. It's a mostly victimless crime. I say mostly because I know somebody will chime in with the exception, and I"m also well aware it's always a victimless crime.

Edited August 22, 2015 by JJFIVEOH

[LGR4GM]

wait, what is mostly victim-less crime?

[Weave]

Was he traumatized by the situation, or was he traumatized because society told him he was supposed to be traumatized? Of course all ages are arbitrary, but everybody is different. Some can drink responsibly when they're 18, some can't at 40. I think she should get busted for statuatory rape, but I think a jury should decide the level of victimization. I'm not saying underaged males aren't traumatized by having sex with older women (we've all seen the cases of female teachers) what I'm saying is many most likely aren't traumatized. Instead of letting humans grow up to decide for themselves what is best for them, society has increasingly felt the need to tell them the situations in which they should be traumatized. She broke the law, she should get punished. But (solely based on reports) it appears she didn't do anything agressively. It's a mostly victimless crime. I say mostly because I know somebody will chime in with the exception, and I"m also well aware it's always a victimless crime.

Who is bringing his traumatisation (or lack of it) into it besides you?

 

As for it being mostly victimless, ask our colleague in Florida who unloaded a great burden on us if he feels more victimized now than he did then. Some wounds dont manifest themselves until later in life.

 

And again, the law is in place to prevent the possibility of trauma. Its pretty well umderstood that there is an unacceptable likelihood of trauma so we make the act illegal regardless of actual trauma.

Edited August 22, 2015 by We've

[JJFIVEOH]

Who is bringing his traumatisation (or lack of it) into it besides you?

 

As for it being mostly victimless, ask our colleague in Florida who unloaded a great burden on us if he feels more victimized now than he did then. Some wounds dont manifest themselves until later in life.

 

And again, the law is in place to prevent the possibility of trauma. Its pretty well umderstood that there is an unacceptable likelihood of trauma so we make the act illegal regardless of actual trauma.

 

I brought traumatization into the discussion because in most cases the boy isn't going to oppose having sex with an older hot woman until society tries to convince him that he needs to be traumatized. I'm not minimizing what one of our board members went through, but that also involved an immediate family member. Have somebody go into a school and bring a picture of the hot cheerleader, or one of the hot female teachers that got busted, and ask the junior and sophomore males if they would oppose a night with them. I've got a pretty good idea what the results would be.

 

Laws aren't in place to prevent the possibility of trauma to kids later in life........ if that were the case nobody would be allowed to get divorced.

[Weave]

I brought traumatization into the discussion because in most cases the boy isn't going to oppose having sex with an older hot woman until society tries to convince him that he needs to be traumatized. I'm not minimizing what one of our board members went through, but that also involved an immediate family member. Have somebody go into a school and bring a picture of the hot cheerleader, or one of the hot female teachers that got busted, and ask the junior and sophomore males if they would oppose a night with them. I've got a pretty good idea what the results would be.

 

Laws aren't in place to prevent the possibility of trauma to kids later in life........ if that were the case nobody would be allowed to get divorced.

 

In cases of divorce, the kids are often just as traumatized by the parents being together....... so that doesn't work.

 

Do you think sickinFla needed society to tell him he should feel victimized?  i'll admit, your point of view on these rape discussions is highly puzzling to me.   That's about the nicest thing I can say about them.

[JJFIVEOH]

I'm not saying women should be able to get away with whatever they want, I'm just saying double standards should exist. Each case should be dealt with on an individual basis, based on the level of traumatization. Age of consent in Maryland is 16. Would he feel any differently if this happened a few months down the road? I doubt it.

In cases of divorce, the kids are often just as traumatized by the parents being together....... so that doesn't work.

 

Do you think sickinFla needed society to tell him he should feel victimized?  i'll admit, your point of view on these rape discussions is highly puzzling to me.   That's about the nicest thing I can say about them.

 

I don't know, I'm not him. But there are two factors that need to be addressed. 1) It was with a relative 2) he was 13, not 15.

 

I'm not sure what is so puzzling, my viewpoint is that men and women are not equal (on so many levels) and society is forcing them to be. Note I am not saying neither one is better than the other, they just aren't equal. (I don't know why I need to make that clear, but somebody will eventually come along and imply that's what I meant).

[Weave]

I'm not saying women should be able to get away with whatever they want, I'm just saying double standards should exist. Each case should be dealt with on an individual basis, based on the level of traumatization. Age of consent in Maryland is 16. Would he feel any differently if this happened a few months down the road? I doubt it.

 

I don't know, I'm not him. But there are two factors that need to be addressed. 1) It was with a relative 2) he was 13, not 15.

 

I'm not sure what is so puzzling, my viewpoint is that men and women are not equal (on so many levels) and society is forcing them to be. Note I am not saying neither one is better than the other, they just aren't equal. (I don't know why I need to make that clear, but somebody will eventually come along and imply that's what I meant).

 

1.  It's not men and women, it is adults and children.

 

2. If we wait until we can determine trauma, the victims may be middle aged before we can prosecute. 

 

3. If age isn't the big deal, 13, 15, what's the diff?  it's your very argument.  Curious you use it in reverse here.

[JJFIVEOH]

If there's something puzzling about my points, feel free to ask. I don't want to be misunderstood, sometimes it's tough to get the point across on an internet forum.

 

I've gotta run, but I'll get back to it eventually.

[Weave]

If there's something puzzling about my points, feel free to ask. I don't want to be misunderstood, sometimes it's tough to get the point across on an internet forum.

 

I've gotta run, but I'll get back to it eventually.

 

I think I understand you just fine. You want to treat this as boys handle it better than girls so lets not rush to punish. It's that point of view that troubles.

[JJFIVEOH]

1.  It's not men and women, it is adults and children.

 

2. If we wait until we can determine trauma, the victims may be middle aged before we can prosecute. 

 

3. If age isn't the big deal, 13, 15, what's the diff?  it's your very argument.  Curious you use it in reverse here.

 

I didn't say it wasn't a big deal, I said there should be double standards. I also mentioned that there is a difference between a relative and a non-relative.

 

Should we really get into every possible scenario that can affect people later in life? Because if we can there are hundreds of things that need to be outlawed. (Although it seems we're doing everything in our power to do just that).

[Weave]

I didn't say it wasn't a big deal, I said there should be double standards. I also mentioned that there is a difference between a relative and a non-relative.

 

Should we really get into every possible scenario that can affect people later in life? Because if we can there are hundreds of things that need to be outlawed. (Although it seems we're doing everything in our power to do just that).

 

You've indicated many times in this conversation that age isn't a big factor for you.  I'm not bothering to quote them but they are here.

 

There aren't going to be any revelations if this continues.  it's pretty apparent that we are going to fundamentally disagree on the concept of prosecuting and punishing not just because of the existence of trauma, but also to discourage others.  I mean, what they hey, Darryl Sydor didn't harm anyone when he blew a 0.30.  Wink, wink.... don't do it again, you silly!

I'll further add,  it is the mindset that, hey, it was a male "victim".  Males want sex so if he's OK, it's OK, is exactly the kind of male dominated thinking that is at the very forefront of every turn this topic has taken.  It's backwards, frankly.

[sicknfla]

I didn't say it wasn't a big deal, I said there should be double standards. I also mentioned that there is a difference between a relative and a non-relative.

 

Should we really get into every possible scenario that can affect people later in life? Because if we can there are hundreds of things that need to be outlawed. (Although it seems we're doing everything in our power to do just that).

My situation was unique. 13 is different than 15. However, there is a reason kids drive at 16, drink at 21, etc. You can't let whether the kid enjoyed it or not fair into the equation. He is a minor. He will realize as he gets older how twisted it was. A kid should never be put into that position. Whether he wants to be or not. There is a reason children are called children and adults are adults.

 

I am going to put this in kind of a over the top way. JJ - if your 15 year old daughter WANTED to and HAD sex with a middle aged man how would you feel? She still wanted it. She was still willing. You would want to kill him. If your 15 year old son slept with your wifes friend or his teacher you would expect that female to be held to a different standard than the man? Would you pat him on the back and give him a "that a boy - you take after the old man".

[bbb]

And then there is this:  https://witchwind.wordpress.com/2013/12/15/piv-is-always-rape-ok/   Probably NSFW.

 

What the hell was that?

 

[Weave]

What the hell was that?

 

 

An extreme point of view on what constitutes rape.

[bbb]

I'd call it an insane point of view.