quote:

ORIGINAL: marie2

quote:

ORIGINAL: DavanKael

I mean, given the puritanical views at work in this country, it's not like most Parents are going to open their homes so that their kids can safely and in the safety of their own homes share such things.   
  Davan

I disagree with this statement. 

As the parent of a 15 yr old, I can tell you that they are beginning sex education in the classroom in sixth grade, and it includes birth control methods, and encourages the kids to talk to their parents and doctors about their sexual concerns and issues.  I remember it well, as I had to sign a paper giving my permission for my daughter to participate.  I believe there was one parent in a class of 22 who didn't allow their child to take the course.  Of course this was only one town in one school, but I would question where you are getting the stats on how "most parents" handle their children's budding sexuality.

In addition to that, when I took my daughter for a school physical last year, at the age of 14, the doctor asked me to leave the room.  I asked my girl if she was alright with that, and she was, so I left, but she confided in me afterwards that the doctor addressed her sexuality and asked her is she was sexually active and needed birth control etc.  This is perfectly acceptable nowadays for the doc to talk to your child alone after the age of 14.  This is just another example of kids getting the idea that it's ok and it's acceptable and normal for them to be sexual beings.

I know many parents, myself included, who are responsible, reasonable and open minded enough that their kids can come to them with this stuff.  That's all I'm going to say here without divulging my child's personal life, but trust me, as a parent of a teen, who knows a lot of parents of teens, it's not as "puritanical" a country as you assume it is.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TroubleInMotion

Are sex laws effective, and if so, are they just?

In the case of Georgia's blowjob-in-the-classroom, we can clearly see the law is effective in terms of prosecuting legals who engage minors in sexual behavior, which is obviously good at protecting children from predators. The real question is whether it's just when the 'adult' (and I use the term loosely) is charged in a victimless crime to the same extent as a rapist or sexual predator. The assumption made by the law is that a fifteen year old is a minor and thus incapable of making sound decisions on behalf of themselves, meaning that it doesn't matter whether they consent or not. So I ask myself in general terms, how much better is a sixteen year old at making sound decisions than a fifteen year old? (then I laugh or cry...)

When this situation hit the public, what do you think the parents of the fifteen year old did? Did they view him as a victim of a sex crime and get him councelling to make him better? OR, did they punish him for being a dumbass and slap him senseless? None of us really know, but I'm fairly confident this boy wasn't in therapy for years over this one.

Where this all feels 'dirty' to me is the manner in which the law lacks in differentiation between rapists and victimless criminals. Does a sixteen year old deserve to be branded for life as a sexual predator for giving a fifteen year old a blowjob? I'd sincerely hope not, but the law doesn't make room for these kinds of exceptions, which is where you get these exaggerated situations. The question on my mind is, did the parents of the fifteen year old have a say in the outcome of this debacle?

I honestly believe that these situations are induced because of our hyper-sensitivity to sexual abuse against minors. While in itself is not a bad thing, the laws are a knee-jerk reaction that seldom allow for exceptional circumstances, and condemn all under the singular banner of 'sexual predator'. When a law isn't flexible enough to allow for extenuating circumstances, I feel that justice, while blind, suffers the most in those instances.

quote:

No. A seventeen year old girl was given probation for giving a blowjob to a fifteen year old in class, in public, in front of her peers while the teacher was distracted. When she consistently failed to meet the requirements of her probation as a result of her criminal action, she was sent to prison.

quote:

ORIGINAL: interlocutor

Georgia Sex Offender Registry

A girl gave a blow job to a boy. This led to her being PUT IN JAIL for a year.

If you are OK with her incarceration either you don't know what jail is really like or you are deranged. If you are OK with her being subject to the above Georgia Sex Offender Registry laws you have no business practicing anything to do with BDSM, because it could just as easily be you.

quote:

Less than 50 years ago it was illegal for a white person and a black person to dance together in many US states. 30 years ago gay people were jailed for holding hands in public. In Georgia, a teenage girl was arrested and put in jail for giving a blow job to a teenage boy in 1996. Some people are OK with these things. I am not. I try to speak up and speak out against racism, bigotry and puritanism because that is not the America I want my children to inherit.

quote:

As an aside, people saying this is US law are not exactly accurate. The laws in the US are different for every state. Some states are more sane than others, but there are still racists and bigots and puritanical zealots in a lot of the southern states. This is reflected in their laws and the enforcement of their laws.

quote:

ORIGINAL: interlocutor

No. A seventeen year old girl was given probation for giving a blowjob to a fifteen year old in class, in public, in front of her peers while the teacher was distracted. When she consistently failed to meet the requirements of her probation as a result of her criminal action, she was sent to prison.

17 = teenager
15 = teenager

Because she was arrested and convicted of a "sex crime" she was subject to to incarceration after not following closely enough the tenants of her punishment (probation). In other words she went to jail for a blow job. Phrase it how ever you want but her freedom wouldn't have been in jeopardy if she wasn't (unreasonably) convicted of a "sex crime." She was convicted of "sodomy with a minor." The only bearing that being in public had was that was how she was caught. She was not convicted of any crime against "the public." The same conviction would be "valid" if she did it in her bedroom and she was caught by public authorities.

You seem to be condoning the criminalization of oral sex between consenting teenagers. If this is not what you mean then please explain.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DavanKael 
And, I'm not, in any way, saying that the girl was right for not meeting the commitments she agreed to
It just strikes me as extreme. 
Davan

quote:

ORIGINAL: Missokyst

Which is probably why she, and any adult in her life should have made sure she followed her obligations. 
If I was a kid or not, you can bet your ass I would have

quote:

ORIGINAL: DavanKael 
And, I'm not, in any way, saying that the girl was right for not meeting the commitments she agreed to
It just strikes me as extreme. 
Davan

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

quote:

ORIGINAL: interlocutor

Georgia Sex Offender Registry

A girl gave a blow job to a boy. This led to her being PUT IN JAIL for a year.

If you are OK with her incarceration either you don't know what jail is really like or you are deranged. If you are OK with her being subject to the above Georgia Sex Offender Registry laws you have no business practicing anything to do with BDSM, because it could just as easily be you.

That's not entirely correct, as I already addressed.  As long as I'm not giving blow jobs or having other forms of physical sex in public, these are not the types of laws that I'm breaking.  What I could be convicted of would be related to assault, because legally, a person can't give Me their consent to beat them in the state of GA.  Prior to moving here this month, I lived in the Augusta, GA area for five years.  (That's not that far off from Harlem, GA.)

quote:

Less than 50 years ago it was illegal for a white person and a black person to dance together in many US states. 30 years ago gay people were jailed for holding hands in public. In Georgia, a teenage girl was arrested and put in jail for giving a blow job to a teenage boy in 1996. Some people are OK with these things. I am not. I try to speak up and speak out against racism, bigotry and puritanism because that is not the America I want my children to inherit.

This one kind of makes us even, because I don't want My grand um attending schools where blow jobs in classrooms are acceptable.

quote:

As an aside, people saying this is US law are not exactly accurate. The laws in the US are different for every state. Some states are more sane than others, but there are still racists and bigots and puritanical zealots in a lot of the southern states. This is reflected in their laws and the enforcement of their laws.

Here you are correct.  This was a GA state law and not a Federal one.

quote:

ORIGINAL: interlocutor

No. A seventeen year old girl was given probation for giving a blowjob to a fifteen year old in class, in public, in front of her peers while the teacher was distracted. When she consistently failed to meet the requirements of her probation as a result of her criminal action, she was sent to prison.

17 = teenager
15 = teenager

Because she was arrested and convicted of a "sex crime" she was subject to to incarceration after not following closely enough the tenants of her punishment (probation). In other words she went to jail for a blow job. Phrase it how ever you want but her freedom wouldn't have been in jeopardy if she wasn't (unreasonably) convicted of a "sex crime." She was convicted of "sodomy with a minor." The only bearing that being in public had was that was how she was caught. She was not convicted of any crime against "the public." The same conviction would be "valid" if she did it in her bedroom and she was caught by public authorities.

You seem to be condoning the criminalization of oral sex between consenting teenagers. If this is not what you mean then please explain.

Actually, she still would have been convicted of a sex crime, just not a sex crime against a minor.  If the same thing happened today, she wouldn't be have had the same charge against her, as there is now a "Romeo and Juliet" clause to the law.  However, she still would have been guilty of a sexual act in a public place. 

Here are a few items that the article doesn't mention.  Under the Columbia County district schools student code of conduct, it very specifically states that any sexual activity on school grounds or buses, by policy, will be prosecuted under under the law.  I took this directly from the Student Code of Conduct for Columbia County Schools.

Violations of Georgia Law – Any student who violates any provision of Georgia’s
criminal law or a Columbia County municipal ordinance while the student is on
campus, on school property, on school buses or other school vehicles, at school
sponsored events, or off of school property provided that the actions cause a
substantial disruption of the educational environment, may be subject to
recommendation for long-term suspension or expulsion. This violation shall be
reported to the proper law enforcement agency. Please be advised that the Columbia
County School System and local law enforcement agencies operate cooperatively
under a Memorandum of Understanding. Violations of the law reported to the
Columbia County Sheriff’s Office, Grovetown Police Department and/or the Harlem
Police Department, which occurred or are occurring within the jurisdiction of any
Columbia County school campus shall be handled by the appropriate law enforcement
agency. The decision to bring criminal charges will rest solely with the appropriate law
enforcement agency and any illegal contraband or any illegal substance taken into
possession will remain in the custody of the appropriate law enforcement agency. The
Columbia County Board of Education Department of School Safety officers will not
house or retain evidence gathered in the course of any investigation.

The other thing that I found while researching the specifics of this woman's case was the fact that this wasn't her only criminal conviction.  She also has been convicted of shoplifting, something they tend to frown on while a person is on probation.  I tend to think that additional crime, along with her skipping her probation appointments, is more likely what actually landed her in jail.  That information is found in her own suit against the state of GA that she filed in Nov of 2008. 

Here's why she filed suit.  She and her husband bought a home.  That property exists within 1000 yards of a day care center at a church, which GA law says that a convicted sex offender can not reside.  At first, they put the house in just the husband's name, until the county came to evict her.  Had they put the house in both of their names to begin with, they would have been covered as a pre-established residence under a 2003 law.  That same suit also asks that she be removed from the GA sex offender registry.  Something she could have done years ago, rather than attempting to skirt her legal issues.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DavanKael

That age for sex ed isn't forward-thinking, marie2; I had my first sex ed class in elementary school and I'm almost 20 years older than your kid. 

quote:

I got the ammo from my assertion from walking around, living life, working with kids, interacting with kids and parents, etc. 

quote:

I've gotten 'the nod' from people I respect to give their kids 'the talk' because they can't stand the idea of doing it. 

quote:

Clearly, imo (And, not that you need my approval), your approach rocks and gives your teen a great basis for a healthy approach to sexuality.

quote:

I wish I was in error, I hope I am wrong (Because I'd rather a lot of kids have safe, happy sex lives than for me to be right about puritanism: believe me, I wish that strongly!): but, it's not what I've seen as 'the standard'.

quote:

And, I'm guessing that if the news scenario we're discussing had come up with your child (Universe forbid), that you'd have been more involved and more sensible than any parents seem to have been here: and I also think that you'd do anything in your power not to have your kid branded as a sex offender over it. 
Davan

quote:

ORIGINAL: marie2
I'm ten years older than you, and when I was going to school we didn't get sex ed until high school.  The fact that in subsequent years they began giving sex ed to kids in grammar school would indicate, to me anyway, that society is moving with the times, at least in the public school system.  And if memory serves me correctly, the sex ed that I had didn't involve lessons on how to put a condom on. 

quote:



Good, I am glad they're teaching kids to do that.  Seriously; if it prevents an unwanted pregnancy and/or disease, awesome!  :>  If it 'demystifies' or oogs kids out less to get condoms because they see them, that totally rocks! 
The sex ed that started in my elementary school wasn't that thorough, no. 
And, alas, the condom thing in school was an issue that some of my friends and I tried to rectify by petitioning the school to offer condoms to kids in the health suite/nurse's office: that did not float. 

I'm not saying that there aren't a lot of uptight parents, my point was more about society as a whole not really being all that puritanical.  I don't know, I seem to see sex everywhere we turn, from PG13 movies to prime time sitcoms to magazines on the news stand.

quote:



****See, I disagree and it could be a perspective thing, it could be an age thing, it could be something else entirely but I think that despite some forward strides, we're still dealing with ridiculous puritanism. 
And, more to my offense is the constant violence (And, I don't mean the fun, consensual kind we speak of here most of the time) that kids see on TV.  I would, if I had kids, much rather them see things that encompass sexuality rather than violence. 

Well, yeah it's definitely a squicky thing to have to do, and I will admit I was more than happy that the ice was broken in school.  It made it somewhat easier for me when I had to deal with "the talk". 

quote:



****See, I don't find it squicky at all.  I am honored that people understand I am sex-positive and respet-worthy enough to talk with their kids on the topic in an age-appropriate way. 

quote]
Thanks for the kudos, it's definitely a freaky thing to deal with,  but fortunately for me, my kid was actually very comfortable coming to me with the topic which made my job way easier.

quote:



****But, see, you deserve credit for cultivating the environment for that to happen. 

Yes, but going to the other extreme isn't a good thing either.  It's not easy to teach teenagers the balance...sex with responsibility etc etc.   Often a teenage's maturity isn't up to the same level as their raging hormones, so it's hard as parent to say...hmm do we discourage their interest?  Do we encourage it?  Do we stay neutral etc etc. 

quote:



****Wasn't advocating the other extreme.  I don't think that because there's a kid blowing another kid in class that classrooms are suddenly going to become blow-job festivals (And, if they do, then, I'm going to advocate for fairness and equality and that the female equivalent also be taught, lol!).  I also don't think that so harsh a point needed to be made at any point. 

Hypothetically speaking, if my kid had made such a poor decision, I would have made sure that she went to her scheduled probation check ins, so as not to worsen the situation to the point that it's gotten to in this news story.  The parents should play a huge role in any situation like this.  But I do think at 17, she should have known better.  The bottom line the way I see it, is if you're not mature enough to know where and when sex is appropriate, you're not mature enough to be having sex. 

****I agree: the parents fell worfully short.  I also agree that a 17 year old should have more sense (Hell, at 17, I was in college and less than a year away from being married!) but because a kid does something that's not the most well-guided thing (Even several times), does hanging one of society's worst stigmas on them really seem fair? 
  Davan

quote:

ORIGINAL: Falkenstein

Hello everybody,

I read recently an article in the last edition of The Economist that I got from a neighbouring boat. it is called "Unjust and ineffective" and is about the punition of sexual delicts in the USA. It quite upset me. One case of a woman is particulary disgusting: having as a teenager given a blow job to another one, but younger, she got convicted for "sodomy on a minor", is livelong registred in a sex offender online register... She could be as well branded on her forehead.

I have no qualm with taking out really dangerous criminals, but this offends my most basic sence of justice.

I also wonder, could this not happen to our community too?

I will not comment here any further, I have other duties for the next days, But I really recommend to read the article: it is chilling.
It is on The Economist web site, there is an editorial and the article is under

http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14164614&CFID=73550468&CFTOKEN=68009113

I wish I could wish you a good reading

quote:

ORIGINAL: marie2

quote:

ORIGINAL: DavanKael

That age for sex ed isn't forward-thinking, marie2; I had my first sex ed class in elementary school and I'm almost 20 years older than your kid. 

I'm ten years older than you, and when I was going to school we didn't get sex ed until high school. 

quote:



What I see here is the law treating a grey situation as if it were black and white.

17 and 15 are both teenage, minors and immature. Both are within the age range of puberty say 12 to 25 where hormones, emotions and impulses makes said adolescent act anywhere between a petulant three year old and a crotchety 70 year old and back, subjecting parents, peers and all others to an emotional roller coaster.

But we are dealing here with a 17 year old. Now they might believe that they are mature enough and adult enough, but they're not. It is the immaturity of both which makes this a grey area.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DavanKael


****I agree: the parents fell worfully short.  I also agree that a 17 year old should have more sense (Hell, at 17, I was in college and less than a year away from being married!) but because a kid does something that's not the most well-guided thing (Even several times), does hanging one of society's worst stigmas on them really seem fair? 
Davan