 |
| Do you know your state's age of consent? |
It was not until the 1920s that states within the United States actually started raising their "ages of consent", with most states settling on ages from 14 to 18.
Prior to 1889, the age of consent in California was age 10. That's right, a 10 year old in California could participate in sexual activity and be within the law. In 1889, California raised the age of consent to 14, in 1897 to 16 and in 1913 to age 18.
I have always understood that when states make laws, they are to protect the people. But when a state sets the age of consent to, let's say 16, who is the law really protecting? In establishing these age of consent laws, it seems that the age of the male makes absolutely no difference.
Here's an example of what I'm talking about: Let's assume that we have a 17 year old boy and a 17 year old girl who are having a sexually active relationship in a state where the "age of consent" is age 18. Under state law, the boy was actually guilty of statutory rape, sexual assault against a child, or some other sex crime. This boy, if convicted of a sex crime, could be required to register as a sex offender and have the rest of his life totally destroyed.
How about the girl? Well, she was officially pronounced to be an innocent victim. It makes no legal difference whether she was actually a victim or an eager and willing participant in the crime.
The state of Tennessee may have attempted to make some progress in this area, by making a somewhat clearer definition of "statutory rape":
"39-13-506. Statutory rape.Statute text
(a) Statutory rape is sexual penetration of a victim by the defendant or of the defendant by the victim when the victim is at least thirteen (13) but less than eighteen (18) years of age and the defendant is at least four (4) years older than the victim.
(b) If the person accused of statutory rape is under eighteen (18) years of age, such a defendant shall be tried as a juvenile and shall not be transferred for trial as an adult."So, let's look at an example of a 19 year old boy and a 17 year old girl who have consensual sex.
Since the girl was under 18 and might be considered the "victim" of statutory rape, under Tennessee law is the boy in the clear because he is not more than four years older than the victim?
It is true that more than likely neither of these two people are responsible enough to engage in sexual activity, but the questions here is, where do they stand under the law?
These "age of consent" laws,on the whole, seem to be primary examples of age, as well as, sex discrimination. In most states teenage sex is a very serious crime for the males. It is a crime to take away a woman's innocence, even if she voluntarily surrenders it.
As with any law, the law can be sound and good, but the real question is - "How is the law enforced?" We have many brilliant lawmakers, who produce excellent laws which would make this a better place for all of us, if we only had those who had the guts to enforce them. If we are to define what is or what isn't a sex crime, then we need to apply the law equally to both men and women, or in this case, to both boys and girls.
The "age of consent" laws in every state should probably be the same, but it is the individual states who will make that decision and to get every state in these United States to agree unanimously on anything will more than likely be an impossible task.
What do you think. I would like to hear what you have to say. Please join me on LinkedIn and Google+.
As a freelance writer, I write on many other topics outside government and politics. If you need some help writing those high quality blog posts, you can get in touch over here. - Ken
