babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
I had the exact oppositite experience than Michelle. I was 17, soon to be 18 and he was 35. It was no relationship of equals. It was a grown man and an immature kid. He used my age (this was a pattern of his) because he knew at my age I didn't have a ton of experience in relationships, so he used me as a toy. I was purely a sexual toy. I fell in love with him, being only 17 and not knowing any better, while he went on to abuse me in every manner possible. He was not the only older man who did the same thing to me at a young age. These "relationships" were not healthy for me, and I certainly was not old enough to fully comprehend the decision I made when I had sex with them. BTW, I was already a parent and had been having sex for a few years. But in the case of the older men, it was clearly an attept tp get at me because I was young, vulnerable and could be easily used and abused by these older men whose only desire was to do to me what they could without complaint from me as I had no real idea of what a "normal" relationship was.
Just because a young girl has a child or had already been engaging in age appropriate sexual relationships does not make it okay, or equal. That's been my experience and the experiences of most of the women/girls I know now and did know then.
I have a 26 year old son and I can tell you without a doubt that he in no way was mature enough at 17 to make a decison to sleep with a woman or man nearly twice his age.
Because we've been having this discussion since 2006 and you purport to have forgotten my views. I don't like being baited. It's just a personal quirk of mine. I also find it repugnant that on a progressive discussion board, someone would propose criminalizing non-exploitative relationships that are currently lawful, based solely on age, as if there is some huge social problem that needs addressing.
I subscribe to the views that many organizations published when they were condemning the Harper-Toews legislation, which you have long said doesn't go far enough (except that you oppose the discrimination on anal intercourse):
From the Canadian Federation of Sexual Health.
A similar case in Calgary
Let's see if this trial judge agrees.
Stargazer, thank you for sharing your experiences and I am sorry that had to happen to you. I know that you don't believe it unionist, but older men seducing younger girls IS a problem in this country. It is happening on the internet, it is happening near schools and it is happening to girls with self-esteem issues, messed-up ideas about love/sex (due to the hypersexualization mentioned in previous threads and thinking they will be valued/loved if they "put out"), who have been abused by fathers or other men, etc. ,etc.
It has been my experience in working with youth that it usually goes the way stargazer described. There is a lot missing from sex ed in this country, which seems to focus solely on the "plumbing".
The Canadian Aids Society, July 2006:
There is a problem with abuse, at any age. There is a problem at work. There is a problem at home. There is a problem at school.
It's abuse.
And yes, girls are messed up by incest. Again, that's about POWER, yes? As it is with a manager at work. As it is with the bully or teacher at school.
Should we not be putting energy there - in stopping abuse such as incest - instead of waiting till a survivor is 16 and dating an older creep? Like a younger creep would be better?
Presumably, then, we should also prosecute 50 year old men who seduce 30 year old women, right? There are plenty of adult women with self-esteem issues who are taken advantage of by manipulative men. Certainly if we're throwing in jail men who take advantage of young women's self-esteem, we should also be throwing in jail men who take advantage of slightly older women's self-esteem as well, right?
Neverminding the fact that by the time a guy feels a need to "score" with anyone who'll let him, his self-esteem probably isn't at all-time highs either.
exactly, writer!
well said, writer.
I'll add my voice to that - kudos!
That's a BS argument and not what Ghislaine had meant at all. There is clearly a vast difference between a 17 year old and a 30 year old. I can't believe I have to explain this on a progressive board. Older men abuse and use younger woomen (girls) all the time! This isn't a one off thing. And I could give a rat's ass about the guys supposed low self-eseteem. Some of these guys get off on using and abusing young girls because a) they can and b) because they have a very very twisted sense of that young girl as his own possession. Apparently the experiences of young girls should just be tossed aside because some men, without young girls I would imagine, think that it is okay for an older man to prey upon a young female. It is not okay. I spent years in a shrinks chair afterwards, and never again was I able to have a fully caring and healthy relationship.
If this pisses some people off, I don't care. It is REAL experience. Not just for me, but for a lot of young girls who have self-esteem issues. It is NOT health and it is NOT right.
And Unionist, what makes you think me or any of the other young girls who fell prey to these twisted screws should have done? Report them to the police? We didn't even fully realize how wrong this was at the time, and how badly it would effect us. On top of that, the cops don't care about rape so much, and especially cases where an older pervert has completely screwed up a young girl.
writer - exactly. We need to spend more time and resources on educating girls and women. I wish we could educxate men on this topic but apparently the majority think there is nothing wrong with an older man and a very young girl. Look at Hollywood. Old predators everywhere, casting couches for the starlets. Did you know Meagon Fox was told to wash the Director's car as an audition for her part in Transformers 2? Twisted screws with power. I won't even get into the amount of "barely legal" porn men consume...
Stargazer, I feel both shock and sympathy at what you had to undergo, and a pretty big sense that I never had to suffer anything remotely like that and will never be able to fully understand that. I'm glad you survived.
But the comments I made have nothing to do with your case or anyone else's. I agree with what Planned Parenthood and the Canadian Aids Society and the NDP Youth and LGBT caucuses and many many others had to say. They said criminalization will inhibit reporting, not encourage it. I guess we'll have to wait and see.
Stargazer, as you know, I have experienced some of what you've experienced. I feel we are something like sisters in this bullshit patriarchy, this world of denial, this culture of predatory exploitation, and I hold that relationship close to my heart.
And I agree completely with Unionist's last paragraph.
The new rules wouldn't have helped me one bit when I was a baby, a toddler, an 11-year-old. By then, I had been well groomed for what was to come. And there was no way I would destroy my family by disclosing my reality. And the mythology of keeping children safe was nothing but a strange joke. A mythology that came from my own parents' mouths, as I sat there mute and dumfounded. Invisible.
I've never said that I thought it was OK and I've never said that I thought that any particular person's experiences should be discarded. I'm not "pissed off", I'm trying to understand why some people feel the need to declare that "the children need protecting!" and then use that as an excuse to control their behaviour.
Yes, there is a vast difference between a 17 year old and a 30 year old. There is also a vast difference between a 30 year old and a 50 year old. There are vast differences between people of virtually any age group. What I want to know is why we should classify people in a particular way based entirely on one seemingly abritrary characteristic - the number of times that person has rotated around the sun. I do not accept that "children" or "youth" or any similar category deserve to have their behaviour controlled by another group that has deemed itself to be superior, in this case "adults". Both of those categories are social creations. If there is something specific which you can identify in "youth" that requires their behaviour to be controlled by "adults", I'd be very much interested in hearing what it is.
Stargazer, I hear your words in that you feel/realize women need to protect other women, and girls, from that of patriarchial preditory exploitation.
If so, I agree and see no reason for male involvement in that whatsoever.
So do you think it is a good thing that 30 year old men can date 15-17 year old girls? Obviously there is a vast difference between the maturity of a 17 year old compared to a 30 year old.
I'm not agruing for "control" over anyone. I'm explaining a reality. Do you have any suggestions how how we can program men to stop abusing young girls? because that sure is a big problem.
Edited to add - yes remind. That is pretty much what I am talking about however, I think we need to stop focusing on the youth and start focusing on these grown men who feel the need to get involved with teens.
well that's hard for me to answer stargazer, as I never saw 20 and 30 year old men as being desirable when a teen ager, I thought they were old and yucky, and would not give them the time of day as an person of intimate interest. And the first act of violence and patriarchial abuse against me, as a teen ager, came at the hands of a male 3 years older than I, who was himself a teenager when it first started happening.
When I was 16, I knew that I was more mature than, Colin Thatcher, for example. And treated him as the immature 30 something patriarchial puke he was. But that awareness, did not save me from failing to recognize someone from my own age gradients propensity to be abusive.
Moreover, we had 2 young male teachers who were very involved with us as teen agers, (mixed male female group) and who we related to, that kept us out of a world of trouble in out of school situations. Nowadays their actions would be suspect in doing the same thing, so I can't see it happening. But never once did they ever breach boundaries of sexual space. And frankly if I ran into them nowadays I would thank them for caring enough to keep us out of trouble when teens, by being positive mentors in social situations out side of school.
wow. Perhaps the fact that they are dependants, they are not-fully-developped children who require guidance, financial protection and every other bit of care under the sun? As well, adults have quite different legal responsibilities in many areas towards children as compared to their fellow adults.
There have been a lot of ages thrown around, and I agree with child welfare law (in most provinces) and age of consent laws that 16 is a good number to use to define the end of childhood. Obviously every person on this planet is unique and will have a different exact time they are mature (if ever!), however there needs to be a legal line and it will seem arbritary sometimes. Youth are also not allowed to drive until age 16. Is that controlling behaviour by adults? Definitely and it is necessary! I would submit that the drinking age and voting age should be lowered to 16 as well.
The exception as in the case being discussed, is when those in positions of power are involved - such as teachers with 16, 17 and 18 yr olds.
Whether I personally happen to think it is a good thing is irrelevant to whether or not criminal prosecutions are the best course of action. If, as in Michelle's case, no one views themselves as being hurt or victimized, then there is no reason for law enforcement to get involved. I don't understand why a 30 year old man would want to date a teenage girl, and I find it kind of creepy, but unless someone is clearly being harmed there is no reason for the government to get involved. Also, I don't think there is a clear difference between the maturity of a 17 year old and a 30 year old. I have met exceptionally mature and intelligent teenagers and exceptionally immature people who are middle-aged. Age is not an accurate indicator of maturity.
This is a straw man because no one is arguing that men should be allowed to abuse young girls (or, for that matter, women of any age).
Sounds to me like exactly the same arguments that have been used for centuries to keep women under the control of men. Oh, but with children those statements are really true, right? I'm not convinced. Those are social roles we put people into, not natural biological categories carved in stone.
Laws preventing younger people from driving may be necessary to prevent them from harming other people, but they should not be used to prevent them from harming themselves. That being said, I don't see why we couldn't allow someone under 16 to drive assuming they could demonstrate the necessary competence.
Exactly, and it is the adults behavior that the law addresses.
Also I don't see what it has to do with youths accessing health services. Seeing as it is legal for them to have sex why wouldn't they access help? If it is that they don't want to be pressured to name sex partners I imagine that would include all sex partners not just those 6 years older than them.
I agree there are exceptions in that some people have had positive experiences with significantly older partners when they were teens. But would anyone suggest that this is common? More common than youths being emotionally harmed and sexually exploited by relationships with partners 6 years or more their senior?
Unionist, I'm flattered that you remember me, and I do remember your tag, but I do not remember your stance on everything. In addition I tend to focus on what is being said rather than who is saying it. Because of that I often forget who said what on a message board.
Because competence to drive includes having a mature sense of judgement which can't be measured. There are lots of adults with poor judgement too but we have to pick an age at which we think the majority of people will make the appropriate decisions when determining risk.
We have to have laws preventing young people from harming themselves. For example, 10 year olds are not allowed to just leave home and go live with whomever they want even though it wouldn't hurt anyone else.
I doubt we can achieve any consensus given the range of issues touched upon, straw men put up, etc. But I am looking at this thread as a fascinating trove of denial and histrionical hostility nuggets re: acknowledging sexploitation and doing something about it. (I won't be so ungracious as to quote anyone.)
Nor courageous enough to name them.
Smear.
An excellent way to smear all in the thread...
I believe martin is speaking the truth here. He is absluetly correct when he says this:
"But I am looking at this thread as a fascinating trove of denial and histrionical hostility nuggets re: acknowledging sexploitation and doing something about it."
The Bish is doing his best to not acknowledge the sexual exploitation. Almost always men, almost always seem to view 17 and 30 year olds in the same light and almost always an excuse that these older creeps give when using a teen's body.
I'm not saying The Bish is doing the latter but he certainly is doing the former.
Anyways, I've said enough in this thread. Women never win in these arguments. It's pointless.
Well, this thread has drifted around a fair bit, but it is still in the Youth forum. That's why I made reference to the clear stands of activist groups who deal with protection and defence of youth - the Canadian Federation of Sexual Health, the Canadian Aids Society, and the NDP Youth and LGBT caucuses, in their uncompromising opposition to the increased criminalization of non-exploitative sexual activity via the Toews bill. You can look up the positions of many others, such as Justice for Children and Youth and the youth-led Age of Consent Committee, besides many LGBT organizations. Their arguments are worth reading and (if you like) rebutting - but they're certainly not founded in a desire to facilitate sexual exploitation of childen.
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2009/07/22/10216986-sun.html
Notice how it is called a "sexual tryst" by the male reporter? What absolutely disgusting wording. It was sexual exploitation not a fucking tryst.
Unionist I have absolutely no problem with you or the information you've posted up. Sorry I didn't mean to involve you in my last post.