+ Reply to Thread
Page 13 of 15 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 145
  1. #121
    GluttonForPunishment's Avatar
    GluttonForPunishment is offline Bubhub Award Winner - 2011- Most Optimistic Poster and Newbie of the Year Awards
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    1,209
    Thanks
    466
    Thanked
    1,796
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by FiveInTheBed View Post
    I'm feeling slightly uneasy with this woman being called a 'sex offender'.

    It kind of dilutes what a true sex offender is...

    Again - this is assuming WE don't know EXACTLY if the sex between the two people in question was mutually fun or even if they had developed a relationship and the two had an even or equal level of mental maturity?


    Do people think babies should be ripped away from their mothers if they have a criminal record and find themselves giving birth in jail - no, there are accomodating rehabilitation facilities out there.

    I can't remember where I read it or heard it, but there was an interview with a [now] married couple, they had sex when she was below legal age and he was just above it, the parents reported him and his name is now permanently on a 'sex offender' list that is up for public viewing. They get people driving by shouting abuse and threatening him all the time.

    I'm still struggling to base any decision on 'what should happen to the baby' soley on how it was conceived.
    I know what you're saying and I understand. I've been arguing from the point of view of the law. When, then, does everyone think the age of consent should be? There's been people on here saying "HE SHOULD HAVE WORN A CONDOM!!"

    He's a child!! In the eyes of the law, he's a child.

    So when do you feel that you should reach out to this young boy and feel sorry for him that he was taken advantage of by an adult? 14? 13? 12? 5? When does "oh, he enjoyed it" stop and "oh my god, she's sick to have done this" start? When do you all empathise with the victim and when do you stop standing up for the perpetrator?

  2. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to GluttonForPunishment For This Useful Post:

    Alphabetsoup  (10-04-2012),Benji  (10-04-2012),Deserama  (11-04-2012),MissMuppet  (10-04-2012),Shoopuf  (11-04-2012),singlemumma82  (10-04-2012)

  3. #122
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Tenambit.
    Posts
    9,037
    Thanks
    1,564
    Thanked
    2,936
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by GluttonForPunishment View Post
    I know what you're saying and I understand. I've been arguing from the point of view of the law. When, then, does everyone think the age of consent should be? There's been people on here saying "HE SHOULD HAVE WORN A CONDOM!!"

    He's a child!! In the eyes of the law, he's a child.

    So when do you feel that you should reach out to this young boy and feel sorry for him that he was taken advantage of by an adult? 14? 13? 12? 5? When does "oh, he enjoyed it" stop and "oh my god, she's sick to have done this" start? When do you all empathise with the victim and when do you stop standing up for the perpetrator?
    I don't know exactly - and I did do a spin off re age...but not many replied.

    I personally think it really depends on the individual and how mature both physically and of mind they are.
    Weigh up the power imbalance etc.

    It's such a tricky subject to blanket with a black and white 'victim' and 'perpetrator'.

    My experience of being forced into sex with someone of my own age (technically 4 years older - I was 21 - he was 25, and we had been living together for years) when I was of 'legal' age carries a hugely different emotion compared to the sex I consensually had (call it hormonally charged experimentation) at 15 with the 19 year old I was then 'going out with/dating/seeing'.

    Maybe I am viewing this thread through biased eyes
    Last edited by FiveInTheBed; 10-04-2012 at 16:54.

  4. #123
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,002
    Thanks
    268
    Thanked
    641
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    I have been wanting to say this, but I keep typing and it keeps coming out wrong grr.

    I guess in my eyes, she's not a sex offender as such...yes she should be punished as she broke the law, but calling her a sex offender and lumping her on the same list as pedophiles who have done things to 3 year old girls just doesn't sit right with me.

    I know people will say he's a child, and a child's a child.....but in this day and age, 15 year olds seem a LOT more mature than they did at my age. I don't know whether this can be scientifically proven, or if it's just because these days kids are more aware of the world,technology,sex etc than I and my friends ever were at 15.

    When I was a kid, there was maybe 4 people in the whole year who we knew had 'done it'....when my mother was a kid it was unheard of.....yet today, my friends daughters know that at least half the year is doing it, KNOW, not just saying so to fit in, it's common knowledge.


    Children are children for a lot less time than they used to be, and I don't know whether the law should be changed, but I do think it could be amended perhaps.
    Heck at 13 I was still playing with barbie dolls and playing post office with my friend....can you imagine a 13 year old doing that these days???


    All that said, I don't know where you would draw the line if you started changing laws...
    Last edited by GothChick; 10-04-2012 at 17:05.

  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GothChick For This Useful Post:

    Lettabean  (10-04-2012),VicPark  (10-04-2012)

  6. #124
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    6,095
    Thanks
    399
    Thanked
    747
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Re: child support being paid to the child instead of the custodial parent.
    Quote Originally Posted by Benji View Post
    I don't see how that would be possible. I think this attitude is exactly WHY there is so much bad blood between payer and payee. Child support is paid in arrears for what the custodial parent has already spent on the child. I'll use my example, I now receive $100 per month. I can go and spend that on getting my hair done, buying a nice bottle of wine, whatever the heck I want because in that month I have already spent $400+ on OSHC, $200 on food, and so on. The "my money goes to him/her" is moot because it's merely a small reimbursement on what has already been spent on the child.
    As I said, it wouldn't make much practical difference, but could make a difference in how people feel about it.

    In your case for example, child support from your ex would be deposited into a bank account in your child's name. Then as your childs primary carer, you would have full access to that account. You could choose to withdraw the cash to reimburse yourself for money you have already spent. Or you could choose to use it for direct payments that benefit the family (eg rent, groceries, etc) or payments directly for the child (eg childcare, school fees, etc).

    In practice the parent would still have control of the money, but it would be being paid to the child.

  7. #125
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    19,776
    Thanks
    5,212
    Thanked
    7,063
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by sweetseven View Post
    Re: child support being paid to the child instead of the custodial parent.As I said, it wouldn't make much practical difference, but could make a difference in how people feel about it.

    In your case for example, child support from your ex would be deposited into a bank account in your child's name. Then as your childs primary carer, you would have full access to that account. You could choose to withdraw the cash to reimburse yourself for money you have already spent. Or you could choose to use it for direct payments that benefit the family (eg rent, groceries, etc) or payments directly for the child (eg childcare, school fees, etc).

    In practice the parent would still have control of the money, but it would be being paid to the child.
    That would make absolutely no difference whatsoever but to make custodial parents feel bad for taking the money they require for their children's day to day expenses from their child's account. Giving children money is useless, what children need is a warm bed, good food, books, schooling, care, haircuts, baths... The money doesn't come from thin air.



    I tend to agree with GFP in this instance, there simply HAS to be a cutoff age for underage sex and the age of consent. It's completely normal for kids to experiment, have teen love and dates but if we start allowing adults to take advantage of teens it just opens up the gateway to even younger children being abused. There needs to be more education.

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Benji For This Useful Post:

    MissMuppet  (10-04-2012),share a book  (11-04-2012)

  9. #126
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    257
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked
    143
    Reviews
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by GothChick View Post

    When I was a kid, there was maybe 4 people in the whole year who we knew had 'done it'....when my mother was a kid it was unheard of.....yet today, my friends daughters know that at least half the year is doing it, KNOW, not just saying so to fit in, it's common knowledge.

    ...
    Oh yeah. Definitely locking my girls in a tower before they start high school. That is ridiculous. It was only a few years ago I was in high school, and girls I knew then were nowhere near that... I want to say sl^tty, but I'll stick with "advanced" so don't sound mean and rude and judgemental.

  10. #127
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    The bright side of the road
    Posts
    3,833
    Thanks
    1,193
    Thanked
    974
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    In my eyes, she was well out of order. You don't have sex with children, end of story, no arguments, no here there or everywhere excuses. And she lied about it, she knew what she was doing was wrong, so sorry love, you shouldn't have done it. You got caught out, and now the weight of that is falling down on your head. And yes, my own past colours how I view this, it is a personal issue, so everyone will have that reasoning in front of the issue. This is why the law exists, because we are so often swayed by our own experiences.

    And as far as why the law exists..it is their for the protection of minors, not entirely for the persecution of the adults, because all children deserve to be protected, not just the ones that we deem worthy.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Bubmum For This Useful Post:

    MissMuppet  (11-04-2012)

  12. #128
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    69
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked
    20
    Reviews
    0
    Oy. Look up the laws in Massachusetts. There, if two minors engage in sex.. Like two 13 year olds- they only prosecute the male, not the female. How bout that?

    Sent from my DROIDX using BubHub

  13. #129
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    452
    Thanks
    74
    Thanked
    50
    Reviews
    1
    I'll be honest I'm biased on this matter due to my husbands situation. I know the law is the law but I also understand teenagers are
    Much more advanced in their sex life than other past generations were so its a tricky line

  14. #130
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    4,146
    Thanks
    345
    Thanked
    871
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Lettabean View Post
    I'll be honest I'm biased on this matter due to my husbands situation. I know the law is the law but I also understand teenagers are
    Much more advanced in their sex life than other past generations were so its a tricky line
    They might be but they are still children and it's proven that their brains aren't developed enough to fully understand risks, hence the law.


 

Similar Threads

  1. Judge orders mum to cut daughter's hair
    By LoveHeart in forum Pregnancy & Parenting In The News
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 14-07-2012, 12:07
  2. Replies: 31
    Last Post: 27-02-2012, 16:21
  3. Victim Blaming - an analogy **mentions rape**
    By WorkingClassMum in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 22-02-2012, 19:57

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
free weekly newsletters | sign up now!
who are these people who write great posts? meet our hubbub authors!
Learn how you can contribute to the hubbub!

reviews
learn how you can become a reviewer!

competitions

forum - chatting now
christmas gift guidesee all Red Stocking
Fridge-To-Go Australasia
Xmas with a NEW Fridge-to-go Lunch Bag! Fridge-To-Go Australasia
Fridge-to-go 8 hour cooler bags are ideal under the Christmas tree! Now in modern lunch bag designs - fill them with toys and chocolate to make parents and kids happy! Stay super cool and eat healthy and fresh food all summer long!
sales & new stuffsee all
Pea Pods
Buy 2 Award Winning Pea Pods Reusable One Size Nappies for only $38 (in your choice of colours) and receive a FREE roll of Bamboo Liners. Don't miss out, we don't usually have discounts on the nappies, so grab this special offer!
Special Offer! Save $12
featured supporter
HuggleBib
The HuggleBib is not "just another" baby bib. Sure, your child may be a messy eater who gets more food ON them rather than IN them, so you dread cleaning after feeding times! Well the HuggleBib is THE best solution to help with all these daily tasks!
gotcha
X

Pregnant for the first-time?

Not sure where to start? We can help!

Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!