This is why the grooming gangs got away with it for so long because these poor kids had adults like her saying that they were ‘street wise’ or ‘sassy’ like what she just said. Absolutely awful. No matter what the child was saying she had the body of a child and that would have been very clear! Society and porn always normalising age gaps in adults doesn’t help either!
Every thing she say's regarding him at 19 implies he's too young. A few years older. He's grown now. He's still a young man at 29. He did something appalling at the age of 19 as if not wise at that age. Yet the 12-year-old implying she's wiser than her years. Act's older. Implying she's "sassy" sexualising her. Comparing her to girls older than her years. As you said clearly victim blaming a child. With no remorse for the her just it must be deeply uncomfortably experience for him. Phycologicaly this language abuses the victim again. People are evil that this is there respons even when he's been proved guilty in court. Which would of been a awful traumatising experience to go through aswell and which would of needed a lot of bravery to go through.
Twelve years old is clearly too young to consent -- i don't think anyone aged 12 understands all the ramifications of engaging in s*x. She probably saw him as a cool 19 year old who could drive and buy alcohol and was flattered by his interest so she consented in orderñ to hold his interest. As far as the male being allowed to compete in the olympics, I agree with AM that Olympic athletes should serve as role models. I understand he served his time but I don't believe he should have been able to compete. Now that it's made the news and other 19 year olds are hearing that what he did was, in essence, "no big deal," that could be just enough of an excuse for another 19 year old to take advantage of a 12-year-old girl's gullibility. The only other thing that is clear to me is that this female defending the athlete has clearly told us more about herself than anyone else. The fact she tried to backtrack and say she saw it as 50/50 came way too late. She called it a mistake. A mistake is when you mistake sugar for salt or creme rinse for shampoo. Felonies are CONSCIOUS mistakes, which is what makes them crimes. I'd like to hear more about the criminal mistakes she made between 12 and 19. Trying street drugs is very common and, while science has proven that it can stunt brain development, and is illegal, it's more forgivable than child r*** because it's more common. If that's one of this speaker's "crimes," it may help to explain her opinion. Her prefrontal cortex could be severely underdeveloped. Generally speaking, the prefrontal cortex, where logic and emotions are processed, is believed to NOT be fully developed until around age 25. ... Which, sadly, could also be used in defense of the 19 year old's actions. Even so, he's likely to still be a risk to society. This type of question is difficult because there are so many variables to consider.
When my youngest daughter was in middle school, around the age of 12, she was on a computer near the kitchen in a chat room. This was around 2005 or 2006. She was telling me about some girl she was talking to about cheerleading but what Christine was telling me raised some flags. People are going to say that I should not have let her into a computer or a chat room. They are right. I was right there. Christine was found I think on AIM? I sat down and read through the thread and could see where the "cheerleader" was slowly acquiring information on Christine. What grade are you in? What is the name of your school? What is your teachers name? The cheerleader never asked Christine where she lived but those three questions that Christine answered (unfortunately) narrowed down the world from millions to under 20. I got on the chat pretending to be Christine and did the same questioning back to the "cheerleader." I did catch them. The person ended up being an older bully from the same school system trying to find out where Christine lived and anything incriminating they could find to bully some more. Christine was absolutely convinced she was talking to a cheerleader because of pictures sent and "she was so nice." That cheerleader gaslit and love bombed Christine to not see ref flags (not that red flags would be on her radar anyway at the age of 11 or 12). We did have spyware on the girls computers with keylogger that people might say is an invasion of privacy. That invasion ended up saving my older daughters life when her "friends" in high school literally sold her to traffickers and she went missing. I got her back no thanks to police, detectives, government who did NOTHING TO HELP. I wonder how much that woman in the video wearing freemason black and white was paid? It is actually working. I tracked down a few convicted child molesters and three wanted for 1st and 2nd degree murder. Two are in prison, one is still loose. Overwhelmingly, facebook defended the predators. This world sucks.
She just will not have been cognitively nor emotionally mature enough to understand the reality of what was going on or doing and the confusion of sex versus love which is a common misconception particularly with girls but at 19 he would know that difference as an older teenage lad. He would have had conversations with his mates about boy challenges to have sex and have the ‘false’ kudos. Just so strange to cross the sea to have a few days with a girl of 16 even if that ls what he thought. Why not meet a girl in his own country. These aspects are not questioned? What were his motives for flying abroad for a date at his age. That in itself is weird. Rape is Illegal yes. But so many other aspects that are not questioned that add to the severity of this case. I know he was convicted and I’m sure the aspects I am questioning here were included in court and need to be when discussing this outrageous response of this woman. He is a rapist and I just cannot belief it was not intentional as the flight and being on his own and did he meet her parents and open up his sick little secret of coming over here to meet her from an online site? I do wonder if this woman had a similar age issue when she was a child and just hasn’t faced the reality yet and therefore vehemently denying the truth of this matter to protect her own situation and soul.
When it come to guys like this there is oh it happened once and never will happen again...we all know that is a crock...it will happen again and again...she in my opinion why laws dont change and ate childrenare NOT safe...and why it is a huge problem...how does the expression go if it walk like a duck if it talks like a duck then its a freaking duck...wake our children deserve better and stronger laws..they are children we are the adults who should know better....people like this make me so freaking mad because they have been through any kind of abuse so they should not have a input..they should start listening with the mouth shut...but thats my opinion..
There should be a shared responsibility, where was the mother hmm? That guy flew over to another country for Pete's sake, that requires planning on both sides, which the girl did as well. He was never supposed to touch her, that's for sure but that girl said many times she was in love with him, so he was just being an idiot, having a relationship with way too young girl. By law he r-ped her but in reality they were in touch for a long time and had a relationship.
An approach towards consent - though not full legal consent - shall b experienced and remembered very differently by the 'victim/participant' than a setting where there is an express violation of someone's will. I think that is where the appropriateness of the term rape does indeed come into question. See Blacks Law. Of-course those underage can not consent but just like cases where an attack is so violent it had aggregating aspects this is clearly a factor to be considered to some effect in this case. Man is now a convicted sex offender though and absolutely should be on a register.
The term would be statutory r-word, i.e. defined as r-word by the law. Non-forcible cases, of course. We can also distinguish between consent _as_ _a_ _legal_ _term_ and consent in the vernacular (synonymous with willingness).
I have mixed feelings on this. On the one hand, he broke the law and should (and did) face the consequences. (I also feel that international sportspeople and other people in the public eye are potential role models and should therefore have a clean track record.) On the other hand, I disagree with the statement that the nature and context of the interaction don’t matter, at least when looking at the broader picture beyond the letter of the law, so in that sense I partially agree with the lady. The law says that minors can’t consent but the law is not based on science (in fact, it predates the science by over 100 years). The science says otherwise and so, for me, the r-word is transparently dysphemistic. That said, the reason I say ‘partially agree’ is because, while I believe that the AoC is too high and that we don’t have an optimal, science-based balance between youth rights and protectionism, this case doesn’t strike me as being particularly salubrious. It sounds to me like he treated her like a notch on the bedpost. Interestingly, the science says that both reactions at the time and reactions in retrospect are more likely to be negative when the partners are close in age than when there is a significant age gap between the partners. Pretty much everyone who is unfamiliar with the science assumes otherwise.
Thank you for adding another word to my vocabulary, AM! A DYSPHEMISM is an expression with connotations that are derogatory either about the subject matter or to the audience.
I struggle with the age of consent being 18. Everyone is so different and parenting varies. While my childhood wasn't perfect and, while I had friends and participated in extracurricular school activities, I was sheltered to some degree. Looking back, I'm grateful for that sheltering because I wasn't ready prior to giving consent at age 20 to a man with whom I was discussing marriage. It helped that my next oldest sister was 6 years older, got pregnant at 18 and immediately married one of the worst possible choices in men (if it's fair to call him a man). In some ways, it seems to me that the age of consent should be higher than 18 but I know that's not realistic because not everyone is as naive as I was. On the other hand, most 25 year olds are very different than they were at 18 or 20.
@@BeingLifted Yes, it's a balancing act. From a legislative perspective, the question is how best to legislate in order to strike a balance between youth rights (young people's right to express themselves as they see fit with whomever, without fear of life-changing consequences for their chosen partner) and protectionism (protective measures above and beyond the raft of laws that already protect adults from unwanted or unhealthy actions and interaction). The average age of menarche in Western nations was 14 in 1900. It had fallen to 12.8 in 2000 and quite possibly has fallen to 12.5 in the interim if the trend has continued at the same rate. The most plausible explanation for this fall is the increase in consumption of calories in general and refined carbohydrates in particular, triggering earlier onset of puberty. With this in mind, I think an AoC of 18 is far too high. One rationale given for the legal threshold is that individuals under that age are not capable of understanding the consequences of their actions. The same rationale is given for ages of criminal responsibility. Now consider that in North Carolina the AoC is 16 but the age of criminal responsibility is 6. In Tennessee, the AoC is 18 and there is no age of criminal responsibility, meaning that 3-year-olds could potentially be prosecuted for criminal offences because the law there says that they are old enough to know what they're doing. It's all rather arbitrary. And yet people seem quite content to 'reverse-engineer' statutory thresholds as though these thresholds are not merely indicative but _constitutive_ of young people's psychological capacities.
I think we all should agree that a young adult ages 18-19 can only date someone whos age 15 or older because wtf. and should be eligal younger, sorry but disgusting
Mind-blowing. Any excuse to continue thinking little girls are grown before they actually are, to make us feel better.
7 years is a significant age difference even between a 20 and 27 year old most of the time. 12 and 19 is not a grey area.
I'm surprised his child hasn't been taken away from him!
The uproar should be that his sentence was so short. He should still be in jail, then there would be no debate about him being in the Olympics.
This is why the grooming gangs got away with it for so long because these poor kids had adults like her saying that they were ‘street wise’ or ‘sassy’ like what she just said. Absolutely awful.
No matter what the child was saying she had the body of a child and that would have been very clear!
Society and porn always normalising age gaps in adults doesn’t help either!
Every thing she say's regarding him at 19 implies he's too young.
A few years older.
He's grown now.
He's still a young man at 29.
He did something appalling at the age of 19 as if not wise at that age.
Yet the 12-year-old implying she's wiser than her years. Act's older.
Implying she's "sassy" sexualising her.
Comparing her to girls older than her years.
As you said clearly victim blaming a child.
With no remorse for the her just it must be deeply uncomfortably experience for him.
Phycologicaly this language abuses the victim again.
People are evil that this is there respons even when he's been proved guilty in court. Which would of been a awful traumatising experience to go through aswell and which would of needed a lot of bravery to go through.
Twelve years old is clearly too young to consent -- i don't think anyone aged 12 understands all the ramifications of engaging in s*x. She probably saw him as a cool 19 year old who could drive and buy alcohol and was flattered by his interest so she consented in orderñ to hold his interest.
As far as the male being allowed to compete in the olympics, I agree with AM that Olympic athletes should serve as role models. I understand he served his time but I don't believe he should have been able to compete.
Now that it's made the news and other 19 year olds are hearing that what he did was, in essence, "no big deal," that could be just enough of an excuse for another 19 year old to take advantage of a 12-year-old girl's gullibility.
The only other thing that is clear to me is that this female defending the athlete has clearly told us more about herself than anyone else. The fact she tried to backtrack and say she saw it as 50/50 came way too late.
She called it a mistake. A mistake is when you mistake sugar for salt or creme rinse for shampoo. Felonies are CONSCIOUS mistakes, which is what makes them crimes.
I'd like to hear more about the criminal mistakes she made between 12 and 19. Trying street drugs is very common and, while science has proven that it can stunt brain development, and is illegal, it's more forgivable than child r*** because it's more common.
If that's one of this speaker's "crimes," it may help to explain her opinion. Her prefrontal cortex could be severely underdeveloped. Generally speaking, the prefrontal cortex, where logic and emotions are processed, is believed to NOT be fully developed until around age 25.
... Which, sadly, could also be used in defense of the 19 year old's actions. Even so, he's likely to still be a risk to society.
This type of question is difficult because there are so many variables to consider.
When my youngest daughter was in middle school, around the age of 12, she was on a computer near the kitchen in a chat room. This was around 2005 or 2006. She was telling me about some girl she was talking to about cheerleading but what Christine was telling me raised some flags.
People are going to say that I should not have let her into a computer or a chat room. They are right. I was right there. Christine was found I think on AIM? I sat down and read through the thread and could see where the "cheerleader" was slowly acquiring information on Christine. What grade are you in? What is the name of your school? What is your teachers name? The cheerleader never asked Christine where she lived but those three questions that Christine answered (unfortunately) narrowed down the world from millions to under 20.
I got on the chat pretending to be Christine and did the same questioning back to the "cheerleader." I did catch them. The person ended up being an older bully from the same school system trying to find out where Christine lived and anything incriminating they could find to bully some more.
Christine was absolutely convinced she was talking to a cheerleader because of pictures sent and "she was so nice." That cheerleader gaslit and love bombed Christine to not see ref flags (not that red flags would be on her radar anyway at the age of 11 or 12).
We did have spyware on the girls computers with keylogger that people might say is an invasion of privacy. That invasion ended up saving my older daughters life when her "friends" in high school literally sold her to traffickers and she went missing. I got her back no thanks to police, detectives, government who did NOTHING TO HELP.
I wonder how much that woman in the video wearing freemason black and white was paid? It is actually working. I tracked down a few convicted child molesters and three wanted for 1st and 2nd degree murder. Two are in prison, one is still loose. Overwhelmingly, facebook defended the predators. This world sucks.
Was with you until the last paragraph. 'Freemason black and white'?? Seriously? Not everything is a conspiracy.
She just will not have been cognitively nor emotionally mature enough to understand the reality of what was going on or doing and the confusion of sex versus love which is a common misconception particularly with girls but at 19 he would know that difference as an older teenage lad. He would have had conversations with his mates about boy challenges to have sex and have the ‘false’ kudos. Just so strange to cross the sea to have a few days with a girl of 16 even if that ls what he thought. Why not meet a girl in his own country. These aspects are not questioned? What were his motives for flying abroad for a date at his age. That in itself is weird.
Rape is Illegal yes. But so many other aspects that are not questioned that add to the severity of this case. I know he was convicted and I’m sure the aspects I am questioning here were included in court and need to be when discussing this outrageous response of this woman. He is a rapist and I just cannot belief it was not intentional as the flight and being on his own and did he meet her parents and open up his sick little secret of coming over here to meet her from an online site? I do wonder if this woman had a similar age issue when she was a child and just hasn’t faced the reality yet and therefore vehemently denying the truth of this matter to protect her own situation and soul.
When it come to guys like this there is oh it happened once and never will happen again...we all know that is a crock...it will happen again and again...she in my opinion why laws dont change and ate childrenare NOT safe...and why it is a huge problem...how does the expression go if it walk like a duck if it talks like a duck then its a freaking duck...wake our children deserve better and stronger laws..they are children we are the adults who should know better....people like this make me so freaking mad because they have been through any kind of abuse so they should not have a input..they should start listening with the mouth shut...but thats my opinion..
The sassy comment is the worst bit.
There should be a shared responsibility, where was the mother hmm? That guy flew over to another country for Pete's sake, that requires planning on both sides, which the girl did as well. He was never supposed to touch her, that's for sure but that girl said many times she was in love with him, so he was just being an idiot, having a relationship with way too young girl. By law he r-ped her but in reality they were in touch for a long time and had a relationship.
Good one, Jeremy ... lots of food for thought.
An approach towards consent - though not full legal consent - shall b experienced and remembered very differently by the 'victim/participant' than a setting where there is an express violation of someone's will.
I think that is where the appropriateness of the term rape does indeed come into question. See Blacks Law.
Of-course those underage can not consent but just like cases where an attack is so violent it had aggregating aspects this is clearly a factor to be considered to some effect in this case.
Man is now a convicted sex offender though and absolutely should be on a register.
The term would be statutory r-word, i.e. defined as r-word by the law. Non-forcible cases, of course. We can also distinguish between consent _as_ _a_ _legal_ _term_ and consent in the vernacular (synonymous with willingness).
I have mixed feelings on this.
On the one hand, he broke the law and should (and did) face the consequences. (I also feel that international sportspeople and other people in the public eye are potential role models and should therefore have a clean track record.)
On the other hand, I disagree with the statement that the nature and context of the interaction don’t matter, at least when looking at the broader picture beyond the letter of the law, so in that sense I partially agree with the lady. The law says that minors can’t consent but the law is not based on science (in fact, it predates the science by over 100 years). The science says otherwise and so, for me, the r-word is transparently dysphemistic.
That said, the reason I say ‘partially agree’ is because, while I believe that the AoC is too high and that we don’t have an optimal, science-based balance between youth rights and protectionism, this case doesn’t strike me as being particularly salubrious. It sounds to me like he treated her like a notch on the bedpost.
Interestingly, the science says that both reactions at the time and reactions in retrospect are more likely to be negative when the partners are close in age than when there is a significant age gap between the partners. Pretty much everyone who is unfamiliar with the science assumes otherwise.
Thank you for adding another word to my vocabulary, AM!
A DYSPHEMISM is an expression with connotations that are derogatory either about the subject matter or to the audience.
I struggle with the age of consent being 18. Everyone is so different and parenting varies. While my childhood wasn't perfect and, while I had friends and participated in extracurricular school activities, I was sheltered to some degree.
Looking back, I'm grateful for that sheltering because I wasn't ready prior to giving consent at age 20 to a man with whom I was discussing marriage.
It helped that my next oldest sister was 6 years older, got pregnant at 18 and immediately married one of the worst possible choices in men (if it's fair to call him a man).
In some ways, it seems to me that the age of consent should be higher than 18 but I know that's not realistic because not everyone is as naive as I was. On the other hand, most 25 year olds are very different than they were at 18 or 20.
@@BeingLifted Yes, it's a balancing act. From a legislative perspective, the question is how best to legislate in order to strike a balance between youth rights (young people's right to express themselves as they see fit with whomever, without fear of life-changing consequences for their chosen partner) and protectionism (protective measures above and beyond the raft of laws that already protect adults from unwanted or unhealthy actions and interaction).
The average age of menarche in Western nations was 14 in 1900. It had fallen to 12.8 in 2000 and quite possibly has fallen to 12.5 in the interim if the trend has continued at the same rate. The most plausible explanation for this fall is the increase in consumption of calories in general and refined carbohydrates in particular, triggering earlier onset of puberty. With this in mind, I think an AoC of 18 is far too high.
One rationale given for the legal threshold is that individuals under that age are not capable of understanding the consequences of their actions. The same rationale is given for ages of criminal responsibility. Now consider that in North Carolina the AoC is 16 but the age of criminal responsibility is 6. In Tennessee, the AoC is 18 and there is no age of criminal responsibility, meaning that 3-year-olds could potentially be prosecuted for criminal offences because the law there says that they are old enough to know what they're doing. It's all rather arbitrary. And yet people seem quite content to 'reverse-engineer' statutory thresholds as though these thresholds are not merely indicative but _constitutive_ of young people's psychological capacities.
@@AM_o2000 I guess that explains a part of my opinion. I didn't menstruate until 16, well beyond my peers, who were between 12 and 14.
wasn’t she on supersize vs superskinny where she was talking about her anorexia story
I think we all should agree that a young adult ages 18-19 can only date someone whos age 15 or older because wtf.
and should be eligal younger, sorry but disgusting