Last night the CA State Legislature passed #SB145 and it now goes to Gov. Newsom. It would lower the penalties for adults who have sex w/ willing same-sex minors. Judge could decide if adult has to register as sex offender if the offender is within 10 years of age of victim.

submitted by [deleted] from twitter.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]VirgilGriff 13 insightful - 3 fun13 insightful - 2 fun14 insightful - 3 fun -  (10 children)

I thought we decided as a society that minors aren't capable of giving consent, and therefore there's no such thing as a "willing minor." Also telling that it's same-sex only. Almost as if underage rape (statutory or otherwise) is more prevalent among gays

[–]FediNetizen 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

Also telling that it's same-sex only. Almost as if underage rape (statutory or otherwise) is more prevalent among gays

It's only "telling" if you just read the single tweet and didn't even read the title of the article linked in the next one. California law already recognizes that a young adult sleeping with an older teenager might not necessarily be a sex offender, but that law only applied to straight people. This new law mandates that gay relationships are treated the same way under this law.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

We don't think here. We only ree about pedophiles (even when the alleged "pedophiles" are 20 and dating a 17 year old) and lefties bad. But throughout the country romeo and juliet laws, where they exist, often don't protect same-sex couples. And the same discretion given to heterosexual pairings, illegal or not, aren't granted to same-sex ones. The fact that isn't just blanket overturned in court on its face is yet more evidence the courts don't care about justice or fairness. Regardless of what standards anybody wishes employed, the fact they're not fairly employed is a fucking farce.

[–]Ergu 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Well they would need Romeo and Romeo laws.

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Or Romeo and Romeo and Romeo and Romeo laws.

There four art thou Romeos.

[–]IridescentAnaconda 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Also telling that it's same-sex only

The proposed law merely extends what is true for opposite-sex relationships to same-sex relationships.

Currently, while consensual sex between 15- to 17-year-olds and a partner within 10 years of age is illegal, vaginal intercourse between the two does not require an offender to register as a sex offender. Other forms of intercourse such as oral and anal intercourse require sex offender registration. ... That practice, according to Wiener, disproportionately targets young LGBT people, who usually cannot engage in vaginal intercourse.

I think it's sleazy to perv on minors, but 10-year windows should apply equally to same-sex and opposite-sex relationships.

[–]jet199 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Then the way to correct it should be to extend the same protections to kids who get abuse by straight men.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Seriously, think about how fucking warped this is for the government to do. Teenagers having sex being illegal? How fucking retarded is such a law, and how ridiculously detached from reality. Criminalizing natural human tendency, and between people of nearly the same ages, it's despicable beyond belief. And I guarantee every single one of these old fucks broke that law as nearly every teenager does. Fuck these hypocrites.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

Almost as if underage rape (statutory or otherwise) is more prevalent among gays

Nope. Recently completed some 20 or 30 year longitudinal study only found a 2% increase in same-sex identification relating to sexual abuse. Non-cohabitating. With no significant increase in cohabitating homosexuals.

[–]goatmeal 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

what's the study called?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3535560/

In instrumental variable models, history of sexual abuse predicted increased prevalence of same-sex attraction by 2.0 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.4, 2.5), any same-sex partners by 1.4 percentage points (95% CI = 1.0, 1.9), and same-sex identity by 0.7 percentage points (95% CI = 0.4, 0.9).