Jury Nullification’s Effects On American Statutory Rape Cases [Part 1]
Back in 2008, a scandal generated out of a small town in Massachusetts regarding a pregnancy pact that a group of teenage girls made with one another. Some of these young girls claimed that they thought that it was “cool” that they were trying to get pregnant as soon as they could, because Bristol Palin, who was the teenage daughter of the Republican vice-presidential candidate, Sarah Palin, at that time, had gotten pregnant in high school.
One of the interesting incidents that tied into this same scandal regarding the pregnancy pact was that a 15-year-old girl had engaged in sexual intercourse with a 24-year-old homeless man so that he would get her pregnant. The press and the media continuously stressed that this man was possibly facing criminal charges of statutory rape for having sexual intercourse with a girl younger than 16 years of age, which was the statutory age of consent in Massachusetts at the time. Self-proclaimed child advocates will rant and rave about how these statutory-rape laws are on the books to protect young and impressionable teenage girls from the manipulation and exploitation of deviant older men. However, it is plain to see that both the above-described 15-year-old girl and her 24-year-old sexual partner intended to get something positive out of their sexual involvement with each other, at least from their standpoint.
The 24-year-old homeless man purposely had sexual intercourse with an underage girl, because getting arrested and sent to jail or prison on a statutory-rape conviction meant having a roof over his head and getting three square meals a day. The 15-year-old girl foresaw the benefit of fulfilling her participation in the above-described pregnancy pact. I will try not to speculate, but I will say that perhaps she also felt that it was to her advantage to seek out an older man to get her pregnant instead of a teenage male peer inasmuch as she would not have to contend with the chaos that goes along with a teenage father misusing their own child as a bargaining chip against her. That is, she obviously didn’t want some snot-nosed teenage boy hanging around her and causing her and her family problems after she became pregnant. Once she got pregnant, she would have full custody of her baby from that point on inasmuch as the 24-year-old homeless man who got her pregnant would likely be spending a substantial amount of time behind bars and would likely not have the financial means to seek legal counsel to help him assert his custodial rights subsequent to his release from incarceration. Moreover, he may not even have wanted to get involved in his baby’s life after he was let back out into society, because he wouldn’t have had the money to pay child support to the baby’s mother; and the baby’s mother probably wouldn’t have seen any point in attempting to go after him for child support inasmuch as he wouldn’t likely have had two dimes to rub together by then.
Now, some of you are probably asking the question, “What about all the violence that was likely awaiting this 24-year-old man once he was incarcerated?” My response to that question is that homeless people suffer all sorts of brutalities on the streets, because the authorities never seem to care much about them and people see them as easy prey for whatever kind of violence or harm they wish to inflict upon them. Therefore, jail or prison probably was not much different for this man in that respect. He was probably happy that at least he would not be starving to death all the time despite that he would likely be absorbed into the violence behind bars that his particular criminal offense attracts.
Some of you are probably asking the question, “But what about the fact that he’s going to be on the sex-offender registry for a long time, if not indefinitely, after he gets out of the slammer?” Being on the sex-offender registry will probably make it easier for him to gain access to welfare benefits that he was unable to utilize previously. It can be certain that once he is released, he’ll have more access to social programs than he did before he got locked up. It’s sad to think that the criminal justice system can actually end up being misused as a social welfare agency here in the United States of America, but it does happen and we need to be aware of it. This same situation strongly demonstrates that statutory-rape cases are not as black and white as self-proclaimed child advocates and societal fundamentalists want the public at large to believe. Sometimes adolescents and young adults actually misuse the statutory-rape laws in our nation to their advantage rather than for their intended purpose.
Nevertheless, sarcastically speaking, people don’t always come out of these statutory-rape cases happy regardless of what side of the legal battle line they’re on. Because of the subversive activities of Fraidy Reiss of Unchained At Last and Jeanne Smoot of the Tahirih Justice Center to sabotage the marriage laws throughout our nation that would normally provide a legal safe haven for adult/adolescent couples who find themselves confronted with an unplanned pregnancy or unwanted interference from the authorities or both, more and more statutory-rape cases are needlessly and unjustly making their way onto court dockets throughout the American judicial system. Self-proclaimed child advocates and self-appointed pedo-experts are having a field day with this trend in the criminal justice system throughout the nation.
There are now significantly fewer state jurisdictions and extended jurisdictions of our nation where an adolescent can get easily married when they are still in middle school or high school and take a prospective statutory-rape trial out of the equation of their relationship with an adult partner than there were five years ago. Therefore, those of us who recognize the tyranny of the statutory-rape laws in their present form have to educate ourselves on other alternatives that may prevent a family member, a loved one or a friend of ours from finding himself or herself absorbed into the injustices of frivolous and malicious statutory-rape cases. Some of you reading this article may have a 22-year-old cousin or nephew who has recently told you that his girlfriend is pregnant and she is only 15, 14 or even 13 years old, and this cousin or nephew has come to you in desperation for a solution to a very difficult situation that could lead to unwanted police involvement. He may even be older than that, and he may even be your brother or perhaps your uncle; and he is turning to you in desperation for a solution inasmuch as he doesn’t trust anyone else to help him with his situation.
It has always sparked my curiosity to find out which state jurisdiction here in our nation has the toughest statutory-rape laws out of any state jurisdiction. I usually get the impression that every state jurisdiction has tough statutory-rape laws here in the land of milk and honey. However, even at that, there are two state jurisdictions that overshadow the other state jurisdictions throughout our nation with respect to how tough their statutory-rape laws are and how aggressively such laws are enforced. What comes to mind is Arizona and Virginia.
You might be asking which of these two state jurisdictions is the toughest with its statutory-rape laws. In my humble opinion, it’s a tossup between the two. That is, if an adult man decides to vacation in either state and he intends upon hooking up with a 13- or 14-year-old girl for sexual intercourse, then he might as well plan on spending a long time in that state inasmuch as he will likely be serving time behind bars there for a substantial amount of years. That is no vacation.
Arizona had a major sex scandal not too long ago involving a 28-year-old schoolteacher named Brittany Zamora who had an affair with a 13-year-old student. She got 20 years in prison in a plea bargain deal, which definitely was no slap on the wrist. Therefore, let’s just say that the court of public opinion in her local area didn’t show her the same understanding that the court of public opinion in France has shown their first lady for becoming sexually involved with that nation’s current president back when she was in her late thirties and he was barely in his teens. Many similar stories like that of Brittany Zamora seem to come out of the Commonwealth of Virginia as well.
Despite that the Commonwealth of Virginia has a reputation of being tough on people who violate their statutory-rape laws, so many years ago I once did come across a very interesting newspaper article regarding some organization in the northern part of that state that assisted teenage mothers in tracking down the fathers of their babies and getting them involved in their babies’ lives. This same organization provided such assistance to high-school girls and even to middle-school girls as young as 11 years old. In that same article, this organization had initially expected that these girls’ baby daddies would be teenage boys no more than perhaps two or three years older than these young mothers. However, they encountered a great number of baby daddies that were in their twenties and even older.
After reading through this article thoroughly, it became apparent to me that this organization protected the confidentiality of the young boys and men whom they tracked down and got involved in the lives of their teenage and even pre-teenage baby mamas as well as their babies. It only made sense to me, because there would not have been any point in this organization tracking these individuals down and then turning them into the authorities in the event that they were adult men. The Commonwealth of Virginia didn’t seem to have any kind of law on its books that compelled this organization to report such men to the authorities on suspicion of statutory rape. Also, the young mothers most likely appreciated the confidentiality that this organization accorded to them and their baby daddies whenever there was a concern over possible criminal charges with respect to their relationships in view of the statutory-rape laws in that particular state jurisdiction.
With all of this same information being said herein, our society has to wake up to the fact that sending people to jail and prison in these situations is not always the best way to address them. In fact, it is seldom ever the best way to address them. Unfortunately, not enough people in our society have wised up to the Draconian nature of our nation’s statutory-rape laws. There is an attitude among self-righteous do-gooders that if you do the crime, you must do the time regardless of how flawed and unfair a particular law is. Reforming these laws to make them fairer to the public and more effective in punishing individuals who truly cause harm to minors is virtually impossible, because self-proclaimed child advocates and self-appointed pedo-experts have a propensity to come flying out of the woodwork any time anybody does anything to present challenges against these same laws to state legislatures anywhere in our nation.
There is this mindset in regard to these same laws that we all simply need to load the sex-offender registries up with as many names and addresses as we can and fill up penal facilities across our nation with as many people as we can, even though such a course of action has shown to be not in the best interest of our society as a whole. The last legal line of defense that we have against frivolous and malicious statutory-rape cases is what is referred to as jury nullification.
As I have pointed out in Part K of my Steemit article titled “The Great American Controversy Over Underage Marriage,” if you get summonsed to serve on a jury in a statutory-rape trial, it is your right to vote “not guilty” in the event that you don’t feel that the defendant’s conviction and punishment in that matter would serve justice. In fact, we all need to educate ourselves about this same right of ours known as the doctrine of jury nullification, because the courts are not going to inform us about it and they are not obligated to do so by law.
A. Juries Have The Legal Authority To Protect Defendants From Unjust Statutory-Rape Convictions
Recently there was a statutory-rape case that took place in Idaho in which a 39-year-old male teacher was on trial for having had sexual intercourse with a 17-year-old female student. His name was Jason Benjamin. Now, I do not encourage or even advocate for schoolteachers to seek out sexual relationships with their underage students. At the same time, I do realize that there are special circumstances that can be involved in such situations as I conveyed in my previous Steemit article titled “American Legislators Are Now Putting Age Limits On Legalizing Love” wherein I described a romance that a twelfth grade teacher of mine, Mr. Greer, had with a female student versus the blatant sexual misconduct of a tenth grade teacher of mine named Mr. Mililo.
I understand that Prosecutor Suzanne Ehlers had every legal right to bring a criminal case against Mr. Benjamin, because the law allowed for her to do so. However, I also believe that it was well within the rights of the jury to acquit him of the statutory-rape charges, even though he was guilty of having broken the law. They didn’t believe that justice was going to be served if they had deliberated to convict this man and send him to prison. Therefore, applying the doctrine of jury nullification to the verdict was appropriate for this particular matter. The 17-year-old girl was not harmed in any way. Mr. Benjamin is not a threat to society. Nobody was ever forced into doing anything they did not want to do back when Mr. Benjamin had engaged in sexual intercourse with this 17-year-old girl.
Apparently, the anonymous author of an article titled “Our View: On rape, consent and the role of juries” did not agree with the jury’s verdict, and he or she argued that the jury stepped out of line in deciding against finding Mr. Benjamin guilty as charged. The anonymous author of this same article argued that jurors do not have the right to act as temporary legislators. In a general sense, I do agree that a jury is supposed to work with the laws that are on the books. However, this was an unusual situation, because statutory-rape laws tend to be difficult to modify or reform through state legislatures inasmuch as regular civilians’ attempts to do so are often met with hostile resistance from self-proclaimed child advocates and self-appointed pedo-experts that come out of the woodwork like packs of vicious wolves to oppose their efforts.
The anonymous author of this same article injects all the same lame and cliché arguments therein that the press and the media have been notorious for doing throughout the years here in the land of milk and honey. For example, he or she flapped his or her jaw about how the adolescent brain was not fully developed. It’s so interesting how prosecutors will conveniently bring up that same argument in statutory-rape cases, but they never want to hear it whenever any criminal defense attorney is using it to prevent his or her underage client from being unjustly tried as an adult for a crime that he or she may not have even committed in the first place. The press and the media wrongfully fan the flames of this ongoing hypocrisy that exists within our criminal justice system.
The anonymous author of this same article complained therein that “if the foreman accurately explained the jury’s position, this was a flagrant injustice and an obvious example of a jury far overstepping its bounds.” Anonymous author? You are so wrong! The statutory-rape laws in our nation are so broken and defective in that they send a great number of the wrong people to jail and prison that it is no mystery why any jury would apply the doctrine of jury nullification in deciding the fate of someone on trial for a strict-liability offense of this nature. You express yourself in your article as though you are the voice of your entire online newspaper or whatever your employer’s website is called; but if that is the case, you are not saying very much positive about your employer. Unless that 17-year-old girl screamed rape from the top of her lungs after she had a sexual relationship with Mr. Benjamin, she has suffered no injustice and it may very well be that she never wanted for Mr. Benjamin to be prosecuted. If United States Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia were still alive today, he’d probably jump all over your case exactly as he jumped all over a California judge’s case for removing a juror who questioned the statutory-rape laws that were being used in the criminal trial in which he was involved.
There is an online article that describes how it is a jury’s right to find a defendant not guilty even though the defendant did commit the crime, because it protects society against oppression from government officials who abuse their power and authority. The name of that article’s author was Timothy Lynch, and he wrote his article regarding jury nullification much more professionally than the above-described anonymous author wrote his online article regarding the same subject. It could explain why Mr. Lynch had no problem disclosing his identity as the author of his article, whereas the above-described anonymous author would not disclose his identity. Mr. Lynch even disclosed his credentials in his online article, which shows that he was actually qualified to have written such an article; whereas none of us know the above-described anonymous author from Adam or about his background. According to Mr. Lynch’s article, a judge can only run interference against a jury if a jury finds a defendant guilty despite that he is obviously innocent, but a judge cannot run interference against a jury if that jury finds a defendant not guilty despite that there is overwhelming evidence that he or she is guilty of a charge or charges against him or her beyond a shadow of a doubt.
B. The Great Amount Of Propaganda And Misinformation In The Press And The Media Necessitates The Jury-Nullification Option In Statutory-Rape Trials
I recently read an online article titled “5 Ways People Justify Adults Having Sex with Minors – And Why It’s Still Not Okay” by Ginny Brown. Throughout most of the article, Ms. Brown is found rambling on and on about a topic of which she obviously doesn’t have a full command of its facts. Even the title of the article itself shows how biased it is. What I found so hilarious and laughable about this same author was that she and her colleagues were begging for money at the top of the first page of her article. My viewpoint of her is that if she and others on her writing platform have to beg for money to keep their journalistic careers going, then their writing apparently doesn’t receive very much praise from their readers or anyone who could make a significant financial difference in their journalistic careers.
At the same time, I still must commend Ms. Brown for not injecting as hostile and hotheaded of a tone in her writing about this subject matter as Eve Lawter did so in hers as I pointed out in my Steemit article titled “American Legislators Are Now Putting Age Limits On Legalizing Love.” Ms. Brown still appears to believe that there are shades of gray with respect to this topic, whereas Ms. Lawter was unfairly dogmatic in her article regarding this same topic. The problem that I continue to have with Ms. Brown’s logic or lack thereof in her article is that she tries to address this same issue with unbelievably pat solutions. In that sense, her article reminds me of the lyrics of the song below from Dionne Warwick.
The Song Titled “Paper Mache” By Dionne Warwick
In any event, the fact alone that Ms. Brown and others like her continue to publish these kinds of articles on the Internet raises a sense of urgency for the American people to assert their full rights in exercising the doctrine of jury nullification whenever they are summonsed to serve on a jury for a frivolous and malicious statutory-rape trial. At the same time, Americans need to educate themselves about this doctrine and how to use it to its fullest capacity to protect individuals from the injustices that usually ensue whenever a frivolous and malicious statutory-rape case goes to trial. In any event, for the sake of fairness and impartiality, herein I now shall address the contents of Ms. Brown’s article piece by piece to provide my feedback on her article.
In her online article, Ms. Brown asks her readers to engage in a social experiment in which they ask their friends if it’s wrong for adults to have sex with minors. The problem that I am having with her methodology in addressing this topic is that she is not asking a yes or no question. Also, the question is ambiguous in that it does not specify whether the minor is a toddler or a teenager and how far apart in age difference the minor is from the adult with whom he or she is having sexual intercourse. If the minor was 17 years old and the adult was 18 years old and they were very much in love with each other, I would say that there was nothing wrong with them having sexual intercourse with each other so long as they use protection. If the minor was a 14- or 15-year-old girl and the adult was a 23-year-old man and they were both legally married to each other, I would say that it was perfectly fine for them to have sexual intercourse with each other, especially because their sexual activities would be completely sanctioned by law. However, if the minor was a 6-year-old girl and the adult was a 71-year-old man, then thousands of alarms would go off in my head and my answer would be a loud “NO!” from the top of my lungs.
In her article, Ms. Brown eventually clarifies that she is referring to teenagers and, at the same time, she doesn’t appear to like the fact that many people make a distinction between adults having sex with teenage minors and adults having sex with prepubescent children. Now, I completely get it. No self-respecting and loving father would ever want his 13-, 14- or 15-year-old daughter to become involved in a “pump-and-dump” encounter with an adult man over 21 years of age. Then again, most fathers would not want their pubescent or adolescent daughter to be involved in a “pump-and-dump” encounter with a boy the same age as her either. Therefore, Ms. Brown ends up right back from whence she started. That is, she offers no valid arguments regarding the so-called ills of adult/adolescent relationships.
The most that she accomplishes that early on in her article is that she points out that people have an easier time talking about the late musician David Bowie having an adult sexual relationship with a 15-year-old girl back in the 1970s than they do talking about 15-year-old girls having sexual intercourse with adult men in general. Of course, people are going to be that way. The 1970s was a long time ago. Therefore, it can almost be like talking about a famous foreign leader having a 12-year-old mistress back in the early 1900s who became pregnant with his baby. Most people wouldn’t even bat an eye upon finding out that the late Charlie Chaplin married a 16-year-old girl after he was well into his thirties, because he has been dead for a long time and such events took place close to a century ago. Distant past events that involve taboo or sensitive topics tend not to bother people as easily as recent events of that nature do. Ms. Brown did not really prove anything by describing this same poor analogy.
I agree with Ms. Brown that taking advantage of a minor is typically considered one of the most loathsome things a person can do in Western culture. However, what she appears to be ignoring is the fact that more often than not it is other minors rather than adults who take advantage of a minor inasmuch as minors have the most access to other minors. Moreover, just because an adult is involved in a romantic relationship with an adolescent minor, it doesn’t mean that abuse or exploitation is necessarily occurring within the relationship as Ms. Brown appears to believe. She tries to muddy the waters upon presenting what she perceives to be “ways” that people justify sexual relationships between teenagers and adults. However, if she is not evaluating each adult/adolescent relationship on a case-by-case basis, then she is really not doing justice in describing these “ways.”
Now, before we proceed herein, I want to make it clear that I do not in any way encourage any adult over the age of eighteen to engage in sexual intercourse or any kind of sexual contact with an adolescent minor below the statutory age of consent in their state jurisdiction. I’m not here to convince anyone to break the law. However, whenever a law is defective and someone comes along trying to make it appear to be infallibly perfect, I have to be the one to chastise that individual for doing so; and Ms. Brown’s article is a strong example of one of those people.
It is interesting that Ms. Brown brings up the example of Lori Mattix in her article. She links the example to an article about David Bowie, which cannot be completely accurate inasmuch as it reports that the late Elvis Presley at age 24 had sexual intercourse with Priscila Beaulieu Presley when she was only 14 years old back in 1959. In an interview with Barbara Walters back in the 1980s, Priscilla Presley claimed that she did not have sexual relations with the King of Rock-and-Roll until they were legally married in 1967; and that revelation shows how unreliable that same article about David Bowie was about reporting the facts.
Nevertheless, keep in mind that upon linking her article to that same article about David Bowie, Ms. Brown is opening the door up to the fact that our society has become very hysterical and even delusional regarding what it believes to be the sexual exploitation of minors nowadays as compared with previous decades back in the twentieth century. I admire that Ms. Brown does acknowledge that whether or not an adult has harmed a teenager through sexual intercourse cannot be treated with a one-size-fits-all formula. The fact alone that she brings forth those points demonstrates that she exercises at least some meaningful level of reasoning in making her assertions about this topic. However, her article starts to fall apart when she attempts to make an analogy involving the serious subject of drunk driving.
Therein she states:
Sex with adults can be incredibly harmful to teens. The power imbalance caused by age means that the teen is much more likely to feel pressured to have sex that they don’t really want or are unsure about. This coercion can lead to all the harmful effects of any sexual violence: depression, low self-esteem, PTSD, and suicidal thoughts. Young teens who have sex with older people are also more likely to experiences STIs, unintended pregnancies, and substance abuse later in life.
To be fair to Ms. Brown, I clicked onto all of the links in that same paragraph therein to read the “reports” that she claimed to support her arguments. One report was titled “Sex Between Young Teens and Older Individuals: A Demographic Portrait,” and the other report was titled “Older Sexual Partners During Adolescence: Links to Reproductive Health Outcomes in Young Adulthood.” My suspicions and concerns regarding the sincerity of these two reports or rather the lack thereof became immediately aroused after I had noticed that the so-called experts who contributed to these reports were all women and both of these reports originated from the same organization (Child Trends). By that point in time, I began to question whether these so-called research studies were really impartial or whether they were serving a special-interest group’s femi-Nazi-fueled agenda.
Reading both of these reports was exhausting and the statistical information in them was incoherent for the most part. It is though the female spin doctors who authored these reports wanted their readers to be confused upon reading their contents insofar as readers might have a difficult time distinguishing whether or not the so-called research study was somehow rigged to serve a hidden agenda. There were all sorts of flaws in these reports’ contents. For the most part, these two reports were replete with misleading propaganda that aimed at promoting a femi-Nazi agenda to brainwash our society into believing that our culture could ever become these societal fundamentalists’ make-believe world of age-appropriate perfection. Both reports appeared to attempt to sell the misconception that the so-called evil older man is always to blame for all teenage girls’ problems and that the adolescent boy younger than 18 years old could never do any wrong to a middle-school or high-school girl.
A good example of defects found in the report titled “Older Sexual Partners During Adolescence: Links to Reproductive Health Outcomes in Young Adulthood” was a hypothesis therein that read:
. . . we expect that having sex at a young age with an older partner is associated with an elevated risk of being involved in a teenage or nonmarital birth . . .
Now, if we were to assume solely for the sake of argument that this hypothesis was correct, then it would provide more reason for the statutory-rape laws in our nation to be reformed so that the prison system and the sex-offender registry were kept well out of the equation if the older partner wished to wed his pregnant adolescent girlfriend who might be slightly below the statutory age of consent. Moreover, it gives more reason for state legislatures in our nation to keep underage adolescent marriage legal where it is still available and for state legislatures in other parts of our nation that have had the misfortune of outlawing underage marriage to revert the marriage laws back to the way they were before so that all adolescents would be legally able to wed once again.
Another reason that adolescent girls (12 to 17 years old) undergo non-marital births whenever an older partner is in the picture is because these men are vulnerable to the Draconian statutory-rape laws throughout our nation and their efforts to wed these girls and become a breadwinner for them are stifled by the authorities misusing these laws to serve their own professional agenda. These older partners are not abandoning these young girls in cases of unplanned pregnancies. They are being ripped away from them by government officials.
If you look at some of Heather Corinna’s writings on her Scarleteen website, you will find that she brings up other research studies and statistics that contradict the contents of both above-described reports that Ms. Brown linked to her article. We all have to be on our guards against misinformation and propaganda that organizations like Child Trends, Unchained At Last and the Tahirih Justice Center feed us regarding this topic, because we have to remember that two of the deadliest world wars in history involved juvenile-justice-related matters that significantly contributed to their conceptions. That is, World War I started out as a situation in which a group of male juveniles shot and killed Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife, Sophie, and it all progressively evolved into an international conflict. The Hitler Youth greatly compounded the lethal impact that World War II had on all the allies, including the United States of America.
The two above-described reports that Ms. Brown linked to her article appear to favor the idea of misusing the American statutory-rape laws to turn our nation into a Fascist totalitarian police state. Just as Adolf Hitler had the objective of assembling as many blond-haired, blue-eyed youngsters to form the Hitler Youth, the societal fundamentalists who authored both above-described reports wish to turn out nation into a society where prom kings and male prima donnas rule all aspects of life, for a lack of a better description. Their so-called research does nothing to help Maddie Lambert with her situation and young mothers like her who are under the age of eighteen and whose abusive, manipulative baby daddies are the same age as them. Their so-called research is not something that would ever have made a positive difference in the life of a girl named Amy whom I described in my Steemit article titled “Underage Marriage Is Not A Loophole.” Do not allow yourselves to be fooled into taking either one of these two reports from Child Trends seriously. They are not meant to improve the lives of teenagers or of anyone in our society.
The two above-described reports that Ms. Brown linked to her article imply that if a teenage girl has an older boyfriend, she runs the risk of turning into a nymphomaniac as she ages. However, any intelligent person who has ever met a woman who had an older boyfriend when she was a teenager in middle school or high school knows that such rhetoric could not be any further from the truth. Moreover, I’ve known women who have married their same-age or similar-age high-school sweetheart to be very promiscuous. Therefore, same-age and similar-age relationships among teenagers are not necessarily more stable and healthier than adult/adolescent relationships.
We now live in a time era in which adolescent boys as young as 13 years old are breaking into homes and raping little, old ladies. Recently there was a major news story about a 13-year-old boy and two 14-year-old male friends of his who were alleged to have brutally murdered a female college student in New York. I’ve given other examples to this effect in previous Steemit articles of mine and herein. The misguided belief that teenage girls are so much better off with boys their own age or close to their age is becoming less and less of a credible argument as our society continues to move on into the future and more stories about underage male rapists and murderers come out in the news. Self-proclaimed child advocates and self-appointed pedo-experts love whatever faulty arguments that people like Ms. Brown can pull out of their hats, because it allows for them to change pedophilia from the adverse psychiatric diagnosis that it is into an influential political construct that they can use to terrify society into believing any lies that they tell them that tie back to their underlying agenda.
I don’t readily buy Ms. Brown’s argument about “the power imbalance” between teenagers and adults, because we now live in an era where there are incels and perma-virgins over 21 years of age who have never experienced love in their entire life. It makes no sense that a 23-year-old man who has never had a girlfriend or even as so much has kissed a girl on the lips can be wrongfully labeled as a threat or a danger to a 15-year-old girl who has had two or three boyfriends before him. Because of the growing number of such incels and perma-virgins in our society, it can be no mystery why many adult men are finding themselves to be more compatible with teenage girls than they are with women their own age in more ways than society wants them to realize. I have come across stories about teenage girls who felt more pressured into having sex with boys their own age than ones who have gone down that same undesirable road with older men. Take the example of Maddie Lambert. As shown in the video below, she had sexual intercourse with her same-age ex-boyfriend, Isaac Frausto, back when she was 13 years old, because he wanted to have sex with her if he was to be her boyfriend and she felt obligated to submit to his demands for sex if she wanted to keep him despite that she really did not wish to become sexually active back then.
Maddie Lambert Discusses With Another Adolescent The Events Encompassing Her Pregnancy
If you look at the latest videos of Ms. Lambert on YouTube, you will find that she has been suffering from serious psychological problems; and anyone can see that Isaac Frausto has been the cause of most of them. Chew on that, Ms. Brown! Because of all the problems that she had experienced with Mr. Frausto, she has made it a point in several of her videos that she would prefer a boyfriend older than her who was out of high school. She is now 16 years old. I give a thorough description of her ordeal with Isaac Frausto in Part 3 of my Steemit article titled “Are All Teenage Fathers Pedophiles?”
The argument that Ms. Brown presents in her article that a teenager who has sexual intercourse with an adult partner can later experience suicidal thoughts is completely outrageous and outlandish in that it needlessly demonizes all adult/adolescent relationships as being toxic. The women I have known throughout my life who were once in adult/adolescent relationships have never been suicidal as far as I know, and they didn’t have all the other problems that Ms. Brown mentioned in the above captioned paragraph herein from her article.
This article is copyright-protected.