AoC laws could send a woman to prison for being raped

[aeterna91]

As is well known, current feminism -with some honorable exceptions- is one of the most hostile movements towards MAP people and one of the most reluctant to lower the age of consent; in fact, many feminists want to raise it even further.

Thinking about what arguments might be most persuasive for feminists, I think that the possibility of a woman being sentenced to prison for being raped may be one of the most effective. It's not an original idea of ​​mine, it's basically taken from the article The paradox of statutory rape, by Russell and Kathryn Christopher, which I recommend. The argument would be as follows:

Let's suppose a teenage boy rapes an adult woman. This is something that, unfortunately, happens from time to time. However, in this case, the only thing that can be proven in court is that there was indeed some kind of sexual encounter between the two, but not that this encounter was a rape. In this way, the rapist gets away with it, but the victim could also face charges of statutory rape: if a sexual encounter between a teenage boy and an adult woman has been proven, but it has not been proven that it was rape and it is thought that it may have been consensual sex, she could then be accused of statutory rape. And while it's possible that she would be acquitted, it's also possible that she would be convicted. She could be convicted for having been raped.

The article includes examples of cases in which this situation, or at least, similar to this, have happened or have been close to happening (Kathleen Harden, Patricia Starlings, Angie Simons, Raymond Garnett...).

Of course, this argument can only be persuasive when talking about boys who have already entered puberty, but perhaps this could be a first step for some people to face the fact that current age of consent laws are, at the very last, dangerous, flawed and not the best way to combat real abuse.

I tried it once and had very moderate success: the feminist I was talking to, who is a nice person, acknowledged that this could be a problem and that it would be worth thinking about.

What do you think? Have you ever tried this argument? Is anyone willing to try it and share if it works?

[Valerian]

Let's suppose a teenage boy rapes an adult woman. This is something that, unfortunately, happens from time to time. However, in this case, the only thing that can be proven in court is that there was indeed some kind of sexual encounter between the two, but not that this encounter was a rape. In this way, the rapist gets away with it, but the victim could also face charges of statutory rape: if a sexual encounter between a teenage boy and an adult woman has been proven, but it has not been proven that it was rape and it is thought that it may have been consensual sex, she could then be accused of statutory rape. And while it's possible that she would be acquitted, it's also possible that she would be convicted. She could be convicted for having been raped.

All these complication of arises due to the law that claims "people below 18 incapable of giving thier sexual consent any sexual relation considered as rape of the person below 18 by the person above 18.
Many people believe that it establishes at least some sort of gender equally on rape but no it does not, this law makes it even worse for men.
I basically questioned the scientific validity of the above dogma in my post named "ANTI-PEDO FUNDAMENTAL BELIEF: SEX HARMS CHILDREN" dated 25th Jan 2025

[gingedu]

People only think minors have sexual agency when they use violence.

[Grunko]

Thinking about what arguments might be most persuasive for feminists, I think that the possibility of a woman being sentenced to prison for being raped may be one of the most effective. It's not an original idea of ​​mine, it's basically taken from the article The paradox of statutory rape, by Russell and Kathryn Christopher, which I recommend. The argument would be as follows:

Let's suppose a teenage boy rapes an adult woman. This is something that, unfortunately, happens from time to time. However, in this case, the only thing that can be proven in court is that there was indeed some kind of sexual encounter between the two, but not that this encounter was a rape. In this way, the rapist gets away with it, but the victim could also face charges of statutory rape: if a sexual encounter between a teenage boy and an adult woman has been proven, but it has not been proven that it was rape and it is thought that it may have been consensual sex, she could then be accused of statutory rape. And while it's possible that she would be acquitted, it's also possible that she would be convicted. She could be convicted for having been raped.

There was a news article about a female in their 30s being raped by three teenagers, two aged 15 and one aged 16.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/artic ... TSTqZNlLTA