Gay teenager faces charges over relationship with younger girlfriend

Gay teenager faces charges over relationship with younger girlfriend

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/may/22/gay-teenager-charges-relationship-girlfriend

Oh yeah, these parents of the 15 year old definitely have it in for the older girlfriend of their daughter.

Said simply; Whilst I think an 18-year-old dating a 14-year-old (regardless of sexual preferences) is pushing things a bit far, things here are being blown way out of proportion and I have to say it is likely due to the younger girls parents being prejudiced.

Legally "sexual contact" is a very broad term and can include something as minor as kissing - simply because a 40-year-old man kissing a 7-year-old schoolgirl in the back of his car is still paedophilia, but I think in this case the term shouldn't be viewed in such a way.

gimmepie said:

Said simply; Whilst I think an 18-year-old dating a 14-year-old (regardless of sexual preferences) is pushing things a bit far,

Click to expand...

This is a sentiment that I find quite interesting because there are very few people who would criticize a 22 year old for dating an 18 year old (except maybe the puritans). The age difference is the same, but because both are adults the age difference suddenly doesn't matter. There is a 13 year age gap between my boyfriend and me, but this doesn't seem to bother anyone.

gimmepie said:

things here are being blown way out of proportion and I have to say it is likely due to the younger girls parents being prejudiced.

Click to expand...

This I agree with completely.

gimmepie said:

Legally "sexual contact" is a very broad term and can include something as minor as kissing - simply because a 40-year-old man kissing a 7-year-old schoolgirl in the back of his car is still paedophilia, but I think in this case the term shouldn't be viewed in such a way.

Click to expand...

Paedophilia is the sexual attraction to a pre-pubescent child. A kiss does not denote sexual attraction, but rather is an expression of affection. Let's not confuse the two, otherwise all parents who give their children a kiss would be accused of child abuse.

I love how we're arresting this girl over something so trivial and putting so much into this while there are plenty of people out there doing far worse things that need to have this attention put on them instead.

Edit: Want to come back to say something a bit off topic, but it is nice to see her dad sticking up for her and wearing that shirt. It's not often, at least that I've noticed so sorry if I'm wrong, that you see a father supporting their gay child. So when I saw that picture, I smiled. Well, I'm happy for any parent that supporters their children no matter what, but ya know what I'm trying to say I'm sure, haha.

Sydian said:

I love how we're arresting this girl over something so trivial and putting so much into this while there are plenty of people out there doing far worse things that need to have this attention put on them instead.

Click to expand...

It's quite obvious that the parents of the younger teen do not see this as something trivial as they were the ones who brought the charges against their daughter's girlfriend.

Sydian said:

Edit: Want to come back to say something a bit off topic, but it is nice to see her dad sticking up for her and wearing that shirt. It's not often, at least that I've noticed so sorry if I'm wrong, that you see a father supporting their gay child. So when I saw that picture, I smiled. Well, I'm happy for any parent that supporters their children no matter what, but ya know what I'm trying to say I'm sure, haha.

Click to expand...

As am I glad for these parents. Their love for their daughter is unconditional, as it should be. It's just sad that the younger teen's parents couldn't be the same way. Their homophobia does harm to their daughter as well to the girl they had charged. But they are so blind in their hatred of gays and lesbians that they can't see this.

To be perfectly honest here I find this punishment perfectly just.

It is illegal in the UK ( and I think it's the same in the USA ) for an over 16 year old to have sexual contact with an under 16 year old. It doesn't matter that she is gay, she broke the law.

I'm not being homophobic here, I'm simply saying that it is correct for the police to act this way and the fact that they are claiming it because she is gay is blowing it out of proportion and putting the police under unfair pressure.

Jay_37040 said:

Paedophilia is the sexual attraction to a pre-pubescent child. A kiss does not denote sexual attraction, but rather is an expression of affection. Let's not confuse the two, otherwise all parents who give their children a kiss would be accused of child abuse.

Click to expand...

I'd also like to address this statement.

You say a kiss does not denote sexual attraction and in the context of which you say it I agree with you however at the same time kissing somebody does denote sexual attraction, for example, the way a boyfriend may do to his girlfriend yet at the same time it can be from a mother to a child which is in no way sexual and is, as you say, a sign of affection.

It is not the kiss, but the manner of kissing and how the kiss is meant.

For example, if an older man kisses a young girl on the lips we may think two things.

That child is his daughter, or, he is trying to molest said child. It is how his body language and the manner of that kiss that we interpret shows the true answer.

I understand your point but be more careful to broaden it next time

These laws disproportionately target LGBT youth though, because the only way it is investigated is if someone reports it. Which means, especially in places that tend to have a higher percentage of bigoted people, gay couples are far more likely to be reported than straight couples and are targeted.

The law itself has a good intention, but the way it is haphazardly enforced and based entirely on whether an adult in the situation is "offended" enough to report it makes it a law that in practice is used to discriminate against LGBT youth.

Don't like who your daughter is dating? Can't do **** about it? Wait a year and get her arrested.

Honestly, you have to wonder just why the parents did this. They were dating for a year. Why didn't the parents intervene, break them up, during that time?

It makes me wonder - Do they really, as they are saying, care for their child? Or did they decide to use her in a effort to destroy this girls life, because of their hatred of gays and lesbians? I mean, it's pretty hard for them to claim they are doing thing to benefit their child - They allowed the relationship to go on for a year.

Edit - Thats odd. I remember reading this story from another site and they said that they began the relationship when she was 17, not after she turned 18.

nvm. Kate's parents were feeding everyone a load of crap about the ages and circumstances.

Arrest Affidavit here. Disproves a lot of the things that Kate and her parents were trying to pass off as fact.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/142642135/Kaitlyn-Hunt-Redacted-Affidavit-Redacted

The Opera Ghost said:

To be perfectly honest here I find this punishment perfectly just.

It is illegal in the UK ( and I think it's the same in the USA ) for an over 16 year old to have sexual contact with an under 16 year old. It doesn't matter that she is gay, she broke the law.

Click to expand...

In Ontario, Canada, where I live, it is not illegal for an 18 year old to be sexually active with someone 3 years younger. In most states, I believe, similar laws also allow this. But it really does depend on jurisdiction. In some states, a person is not even legally an adult until they are 21. Here, the legal age of consent is 16, except where the older person involved in a relationship with the younger person is an authority figure such as a teacher or coach.

The Opera Ghost said:

I'm not being homophobic here, I'm simply saying that it is correct for the police to act this way and the fact that they are claiming it because she is gay is blowing it out of proportion and putting the police under unfair pressure.

Click to expand...

The letter of the law may be being followed in this instance, but certainly not the spirit of the law. A judge looks at both when deciding the case, and if the judge looks at the merits of the case, I'm almost certain the charges against the girl will be reduced or dismissed all-together.

The Opera Ghost said:

You say a kiss does not denote sexual attraction and in the context of which you say it I agree with you however at the same time kissing somebody does denote sexual attraction, for example, the way a boyfriend may do to his girlfriend yet at the same time it can be from a mother to a child which is in no way sexual and is, as you say, a sign of affection.

Click to expand...

The kiss itself is not a sexual act unless the manner in which the contact is made is for sexual purposes. So in that way, I agree. A kiss on the lips, cheek, or forehead does not, in of itself, mean the two people are engaged in a sexual act.

Two people making out on a bench in a part are clearly engaged in something other than an affectionate kiss. Likewise, an adult feeling up a child and kissing the child is clearly doing so for sexual purposes. But we have to be careful that we don't automatically jump to a conclusion when we see something like this. Too many people have had their lives ruined over allegations of sexual improprieties when the act in which they were engaged in was completely innocent.

It's gotten to such a degree that the age-old custom of parents taking pictures of their children taking a bath can be charged with creating child porn. Or when a 16 year old girl takes a picture of her topless and sends it to her boyfriend is charged with distributing child porn. It's all ridiculous.

Jay_37040 said:

In Ontario, Canada, where I live, it is not illegal for an 18 year old to be sexually active with someone 3 years younger. In most states, I believe, similar laws also allow this. But it really does depend on jurisdiction. In some states, a person is not even legally an adult until they are 21. Here, the legal age of consent is 16, except where the older person involved in a relationship with the younger person is an authority figure such as a teacher or coach.



The letter of the law may be being followed in this instance, but certainly not the spirit of the law. A judge looks at both when deciding the case, and if the judge looks at the merits of the case, I'm almost certain the charges against the girl will be reduced or dismissed all-together.



The kiss itself is not a sexual act unless the manner in which the contact is made is for sexual purposes. So in that way, I agree. A kiss on the lips, cheek, or forehead does not, in of itself, mean the two people are engaged in a sexual act.

Two people making out on a bench in a part are clearly engaged in something other than an affectionate kiss. Likewise, an adult feeling up a child and kissing the child is clearly doing so for sexual purposes. But we have to be careful that we don't automatically jump to a conclusion when we see something like this. Too many people have had their lives ruined over allegations of sexual improprieties when the act in which they were engaged in was completely innocent.

It's gotten to such a degree that the age-old custom of parents taking pictures of their children taking a bath can be charged with creating child porn. Or when a 16 year old girl takes a picture of her topless and sends it to her boyfriend is charged with distributing child porn. It's all ridiculous.

Click to expand...

See I am not familiar with laws outside of Great Britain so I can't say for sure what is and is not illegal in America.

But yes I do agree with your points and I also find it quite ridiculous.

@Jay - The point I was making with the kiss statement and the comparison with paedophilia was to point out how flimsy and open to different interpretations laws like this are. But simply, a kiss between two people who are not related, in a context of sexual attraction, is still a sexual act. I wasn't talking about relatives I was talking about two individuals who are attracted to one another.

As for the age difference, you hit the nail on the head. This isn't a four year age gap between two consenting adults, it's a a four year age gap between a consenting adult and a minor who cannot legally give consent at her age. Regardless of their feelings their actions were poorly considered and did in part lead to this problem.

I do agree with you that some of these laws are completely ridiculous or at least need to be amended using the examples you provided
a) This is a perfectly innocent image depicting nudity, nudity in itself isn't innately sexual so I see nothing wrong with the image itself.
b) This is definitely a sexual image but I feel as though it should be considered the same as any other sexual act - they made the decision and they should deal with any negative consequences that arise from that decision - but similarly the government shouldn't have the ability to intervene unless it ends up on the internet (or otherwise widely distributed) because then it is no longer a sexual act between two people but the distribution of child pornography. That's how I feel the situation should be handled... although this was honestly a bit off-topic from me.

Mr. X said:

Edit - Thats odd. I remember reading this story from another site and they said that they began the relationship when she was 17, not after she turned 18.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I read elsewhere that they started dating as minors and a few months after turning 18, the parents were able to pursue here for "harming" their kid. In other words, they didn't think their daughter as actually gay and blamed the older one in the relationship for "turning her gay."

Bigots.

In Canada, we have a leniency thing where if you start as minors (or are around <4 years age difference) then it doesn't matter if one's an adult and the other's a minor. You could be 20 with a 16-year-old or 21 with a 17-year-old and in a way, sure, it's awkward but they assume it as an "appropriate" age difference.

That's what I learned anyway by doing research. Four years is the cut-off between minors and adults. Why did I do this research? Because I didn't want my ex to be charged for stat. rape because he was 22 and I was 15. Technically, he should've been despite my accordance with the affair, but he wasn't :) parents were nice enough to believe that I honestly engaged in the behaviour, too, so he wasn't taken into custody or anything.

16 is the "age of consent," though so it might only apply to minors 16&17. I didn't go that far into detail, though. Might therefore still be eligible for stat. rape if you're 18 or 19 with a 14- or 15-year-old despite the "leniency."

Will have to research again to show where I got that info' from, though. I did that research five years ago so don't have anything on-hand :P (and I'm at the dentist's!)

While we all pretty much agree it's obvious that this girl was targeted because she was gay, legally we can't really call the other girl's parents' motives into question since the law is what it is and it's the fault of the law for allowing bigoted people to use laws to target people. Really, this could have become a great example if the courts had thrown out the case on its face and for a judge to have called for sensible laws regarding young people's relationships. "Romeo and Juliet" laws shouldn't just keep someone from having to register as a sex offender - they should protect people completely

This is a non-story. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. AoC laws are well-known and very simple. While I may disagree with the AoC system to begin with, there's no doubt that this person broke the law as written. The implication the gay rights crowd is making is that a heterosexual couple wouldn't be prosecuted for this, but that's false. Prosecution of AoC laws is usually very strict and there are people in my very neighborhood who have been convicted of violations under very similar circumstances.

Hey, parents pull the same thing on heterosexual couples when they're both or one is underage, so wouldn't surprise me that it's a mess for gay couples too.

I know if I were a parent of a 14 year-old, I would not condone him or her dating an 18 year-old. As mentioned above, we cannot assume either way that the parents sought punishment for the 18 year-old simply because of her sexuality/gender.

This is unneeded victimization on the part of the 18 year old and obfuscates real civil rights issues.

We could however look at the law itself, and separate it from sexuality. Perhaps the law is too severe in cases in which age difference is between 3 and 4 years. But, again, the issue has nothing to do with sexuality, and this girl is not doing herself or LGBT persons any favors by her proclamation of inequality. She should have addressed the law as an 18 year old dating a 14 year old, rather than an 18 year-old lesbian dating an 14 year-old lesbian. Ultimately, she got some media attention, and assistance from the ACLU, perhaps she is better off than if she were male. As minorities, we create inequality when we employ victimization without efficient justification.

I saw a story last year about two gay men who were engaging in sexual activity in Central America, and were prosecuted with lewd conduct and ordered to pay a fine. The couple advocated that the legal system of this country was partial to same-sex couples. In actuality, the story and the couples' testimony was misleading; the couple was actual engaging in sexual conduct on the balcony of their hotel room, in public view. Which, in the States, could get you much worse than just a fine. This is, of course, one of several incidents. These stories are sensational and are actually harmful to civil rights causes given the "cry-wolf" effect. In that, real issues, such as custody and marriage laws begin to carryover baggage from unwarranted victimization stories.

I am sure this girl is not conscious of the negative effects of her actions, but the ACLU should be more prudent in their actions, and have a history of focusing on arbitrary rights and victimization cases in order to garner more visibility and funding at the expense of the causes they support. That is not to say the ACLU only takes on arbitrary cases, they have represented many people with legitimate claims of inequality, but there seems to be a lack focus on the big picture of civil rights and too much focus on the visibility and funding.

Personally I think the punishment is right. The law is the same for everyone, whatever your sexual orientation is. If it was a straight couple, the punishment would still be the same. That decision has nothing to do about sexual orientation.

Scarf said:

While we all pretty much agree it's obvious that this girl was targeted because she was gay, legally we can't really call the other girl's parents' motives into question since the law is what it is and it's the fault of the law for allowing bigoted people to use laws to target people. Really, this could have become a great example if the courts had thrown out the case on its face and for a judge to have called for sensible laws regarding young people's relationships. "Romeo and Juliet" laws shouldn't just keep someone from having to register as a sex offender - they should protect people completely

Click to expand...

We don't all agree. I think the victimization is absolutely rubbish. 18 year olds and older are constantly being charged for the same reason so he case should be no different.

Bluerang1 said:

We don't all agree. I think the victimization is absolutely rubbish. 18 year olds and older are constantly being charged for the same reason so he case should be no different.

Click to expand...

I agree. Special people need special treatment I suppose.

Scarf did not mean that the law targeted her, but that the parents did. Based on their words and actions, it's clear that the impetus behind them reporting the couple was not that she was older, but that she was gay (and "turned her daughter gay").