Summer Nelson

[Sakunyuusha]

one of several news articles

Summer Nelson is a 28-year old woman from Idaho who had "sexual encounters" with a 14-year old boy at least four times in the last year and a half. She was friends with the boy's mother and was assigned to babysit him and his younger siblings in the summer of 2007. It was at that time that Summer and the boy began to have a love affair which lasted until December 2008, after which time the boy's mother grew suspicious of the couple. Summer has told authorities that she was in love with the boy, asked his mother for her blessing, and even told his brothers that she loved him.

You can watch an entertaining 6-minute argument about the Summer Nelson case here.

What do you think? Do you agree with Cenk (the man on the left) or Ana (the woman on the right)?

Cenk's position: if police discover that a 28-year old man and a 14-year old girl are having sexual relations, send him to jail: he's a pedophile. If a 28-year old fat ugly woman and a 14-year old boy are having sexual relations, that's disgusting, too. But if a decently attractive 28-year old woman and a 14-year old boy are having sex, that boy is the luckiest boy in the world and is living every teenage boy's dream.

Ana's position: it's a disgusting double standard to say that when a man does it to a girl it's pedophilia but when a woman does it to a boy that it's the boy getting lucky.

So what's your position?

 

[Sakunyuusha]

I agree with Cenk.

I've got a big post, so I'll break it down into reading chunks. When you finish one chunk, move on to the next, okay? ^_^;

[hide]I understand completely the double-standard which Ana is talking about, but it's just like Cenk said! I've never been a teenage girl, so I don't know, but based on my own being and based on the experiences of just about every boy, teen, and man I have ever known my entire life, I think it's fair to say that 90%+ of them would be thrilled to have had sex with the hot babysitter. Now granted, most of them probably fantasize about it playing out like so: I'm 14, she's 17, meow. :3 But even still! 28 years old, while up there in years, still keeps her in that ambiguous "young adult" category. She's not yet "a grown-up," per se. Then you gotta factor in that if she's best friends with the kid's mom that:
(a) it's possible that they were friends as kids themselves, i.e. Junior over here was inside Momma's belly when she was just a teenager herself; and
(b) it's probable that he sees her as sort of like an aunt, which brings in the whole incest angle, too

[/hide][hide]Number 2: Cenk is right that men and women react differently to sexual solicitation. Double-standard or not, it's the fucking truth! Whether or not she REALLY likes it, 99% of women in today's society will react very negatively if you grope them. Very negatively: mace in the face, "r***! HELP!", calling 911, you name it, you got it. But let's say a dude gets groped by a fugly old hag. Is he going to punch her in the face? No! Is he going to claw her eyes out? No! Is he going to sick the cops on her? NO! He's going to make a disgusted face, remove her hand from his crotch, and step away from her. The end! And let's say instead that he's groped by a really, really hot woman. What then? You know perfectly well! He's going to think to himself, "HELL YEAH! "

So again, even though Ana raises a good point about double-standards being unfair and backwards-thinking, ... I think she's forcing the issue. :| Double-standards aren't always bad. I'll give you some perfectly good examples:

• you give alms to the poor, but not to the wealthy
• you help an old blind lady reach a box on the top shelf, but you don't help a strong, tall young man do the same
• you give car rides home to your friends, but not to jerks
• you lend a video game to your sister, but not to the guy across the street

So on and so on and so forth! The point is, it would be retarded to treat everybody equally!

[/hide][hide]When feminists, civil rights activists, and so on wage war against "double-standards," what they really mean to say is that they're waging war against unfair double standards. For example:

• men wear ties but women can't
• women wear skirts but men can't
• a qualified white man can take this position but a qualified black man cannot
• an unqualified white man can take this position even if a qualified black man applies for it

If a guy says, "Women aren't allowed to queef, but men are allowed to fart" (South Park, anyone?), then that would be an unfair double-standard of him to be putting forth.

But that's not what this is about, Ana. This is about a fair double-standard. Because just like Cenk said to you:

• with the 28-year old man and the 14-year old girl, you don't know for certain either way but it seems highly likely that he's a sexual predator and she's unwilling or at least unaware of what she's doing
• but with a 28-year old woman and a 14-year old boy, the odds are really low that the boy wouldn't enjoy it, and the odds also disfavor the woman being a sexual predator

[/hide][hide]Do female rapists exist? YES! Do male r*** victims exist? YES! I'm not saying they don't. But ... I think every teenage boy has a fantasy like this.

Mine? I remember to this day how badly I wanted to tittyfuck my 7th grade English teacher. She had the biggest boobs I'd *ever* seen attached to a woman (they must have been bigger than DD's, not kidding!) and my eyes were glued to them 9 times out of 10 in every session of class. I also remember how badly I wanted to date (with the goal of becoming boyfriend and girlfriend, and later husband and wife) my 7th grade science teacher. She was gorgeous, and like Michael J. Fox she looked way younger than she was. She was in her mid-to-late-20s when we met her, but she didn't look like she was more than 2 years older than I was. Hooooooooooot. Fucking hot. She was totally "the girl next door" except she was also my science teacher. Two birds, one stone! Damn, she was hot.

If Mrs. T or Mrs. R had made sexual advances on me, might I have been caught offguard and a little abashed at first? Sure. As a kid, I still had a diehard conviction that sex needed to wait until after marriage. But would I have caved in? Definitely. Felt guilty about it? Nope! Enjoyed it? I-m-m-e-n-s-e-l-y. I mean, I still think about those two women to this day, all these years later.

And that's what I think Cenk is talking about, too. He sees this 28-year old girl and he says, "I'd like to fuck her now, and I know I would have wanted to fuck her back then too." Just like me with Mrs. T and Mrs. R. Just like a lot of guys, I think. That's where Ana's argument falls apart: I don't know any girls who had crushes on the male teachers at school, because all the guy teachers were either mustachioed dads, bald grandpas, or ugly bachelors-for-life. I know teachers and babysitters aren't the same thing, but in a way they are. What are the odds of a male babysitter being handsome? Slim to none. He's either going to be geeky or creepy. What are the odds of a female babysitter being attractive? In real life, they're fucking low, but they're still a hell of a lot better than the odds for a handsome dude to be your babysitter.[/hide]

 

[Sakunyuusha]

Now, putting the Summer Nelson "babysitter r***" case on hold, I'll offer my view on statutory r*** in general.

In short? I wish all r*** cases would be treated the same way.

[hide]If a man r***s a woman, the court doesn't care that he was 33 and she was 28. They're both adults at about the same stage in life. What the court cares about is the nature of the sexual assault. Was it in fact r***? What exactly happened? Was it brutal? Violent? Traumatic? So on and so forth. The court tries to establish the defendant's innocence or guilt and, if guilty, the severity of his crime such that the degree of his punishment can be appropriately adjusted.

What's the #1 question which any juror must answer in a r*** case? "Did the woman comply freely: yes or no?" If there's the slightest doubt as to her intentions, the juror is supposed to side with the defendant -- "innocent until proven guilty!" It doesn't always work out that way, but you know what I mean. Whether a sex crime took place or not, and whether that crime was in fact r*** or was not, depends upon the recipient's will.

How many times has this come up in hentai discussions?, I ask myself:

1. is it r*** if a woman wants to be fucked, and a man fucks her, and she's glad he fucked her?
2. is it r*** if a woman wants to be fucked, and a man fucks her, but after he's finished the woman changes her mind and regrets what just happened?
3. is it r*** if a woman doesn't want to be fucked, but a man fucks her anyway, and after he's finished the woman changes her mind and rather enjoyed that experience?
4. finally, is it r*** if a woman doesn't want to be fucked, but a man fucks her anyway, and after he's finished she still wishes that he hadn't fucked her?

#4 is easy to answer: "she got r***ing." So is #1: "she didn't get r***ing." But what about #2 and #3? Everyone's got their own opinions. Personally I think the woman in #2 feels as shitty as the woman in #4 does but that the man didn't r*** her. The woman in #3 was certainly r***ing at the onset of the sex act, but since it evolved into consensual sex towards the end, it seems like a "no harm, no foul" play to me. In other words, I think that only in Case #4 should the man be looking at jail time, you know what I mean?

The thing is, I wish that these questions were what legal authorities would give more thought to, instead of worrying about a person's age!

[/hide][hide]What does it matter if she was 28 and he was 14? What matters is did that specific fourteen-year-old boy, him and him alone, have the power to make rational, mature decisions on his own? Yes or no? Did that boy, specifically, have the ability to discern between love and sexual predation? So on and so forth. If a court rules, "No, he did not," then fair enough: that makes Summer Nelson a statutory r**ist. But let's get rid of the word "statutory," shall we? and just call her a plain ol' "r**ist," huh? Because that's what it is, folks: r***. No matter how you try to dress it up, the crime's got nothing to do with age and everything to do with violation of a human being's will. The real crime isn't "fucking teenage boys." The real crime is "fucking people who can't defend themselves, who aren't in a position to understand what's happening to them," and so on. In that sense, fucking a teenager should be treated no differently by the law than fucking a 40-year old comatose man or woman who is permanently at home (with an at-home respirator and other hospital equipment). We would say that some sick fuck is a r**ist if he fucks a comatose person because he's fucking them without their ability to know any better. That's exactly what we find so repulsive about pedophilia and child r***, so maybe it's time for the law to recognize this and to quit with the "statutory r***" bullshit and just go back to discerning whether r*** happened, yes or no.

If a 19 year old boy and a 16 year old girl consensually have sex, he is not a r**ist.

If a 28 year old woman and a 14 year old boy consensually have sex, she is not a r**ist.

What matters isn't the alleged victim's age, but rather the alleged victim's ability to make important decisions for themselves.

Personally? I think a 14-year old boy is plenty ready to decide for himself if he wants to have sex or not and who he wants to have it with. I don't know any 14-year old boys who would get an offer for sex from a 28-year old babysitter who would say to her, "Okay, let's do it" unless they really wanted to. You were a boy once too, remember? How would you respond if a babysitter made unwanted advances towards you? I know what I'd do: turn her down.

If there's no evidence that this boy turned Summer Nelson down ...
If there's no evidence that he told her "No" but she took what she wanted anyway ...
Then frankly, I think there's no case, and this woman should be let go.[/hide]

 

[Sakunyuusha]

Here are four fair examples, I think, of women who could be about 28 years old. You tell me if you think a 14 year old boy would want to tell these women "no" if they asked him to make love to them. You might not find all of them attractive, but everyone has their own tastes. The point is, do you find none of them attractive enough for a 14-year old boy to want to do? The point is, if any of these women asked a 14 year old boy, "please make love to me," and he willingly complied, would you in good conscience be able to send any of these women to prison? or charge them with the crime of r***?

 

[cubia]

i think this is a question of whether 14 yr old can be allowed to be sexually active or in better explanation allowed in his own free will to fuck with 14 yr old girl or 34 yr old woman teacher/aunt/cousin and fully understand the consequences and be expected to take full responsible of his action. i dont think any teen boy or girl will ever talk with their mother when they want to have sex, already have sex, or allowed to have sex because 100% a mother will said NO. funny fact of life and also the fun of it.