Consider for a moment that not the whole world is american, and Haim (or even Sheen) are not exactly household names where I’m from. I admit that I should have read more background info before sending off a post into the world.
Fella I am sure you can appreciate the difference between laughing at the tabloids and citing them as a source in a story.
1 Like
I’ll take your word that you were unfamiliar with Sheen or Haim’s names, but that leaves us with you claiming that a 13-year-old can meaningfully consent to sex with a 19-year-old.
In the industrialised West (not just the U.S.) that claim is a bogus one, debunked long ago by psychological and neurological studies about adolescent brain development. The only groups that still contest that view in the West are outliers like NAMBLA and extreme religious fundies whose sects/cults that still practise child marriage. And even those apologists for predators understand that their views are going to be received very poorly on the vast majority of sites catering to Westerners (including the many Canadians, Brits, Scots, Aussies, Germans, NZers, etc. who frequent BB).
I also understand that there are still backwards countries whose mainstream cultures, cursed by priests and/or institutionalised patriarchy and/or scientific ignorance, still haven’t caught up to the concept of a 13-year-old’s inability to meaningfully consent to sex with an adult and instead find it natural and normal and acceptable. If you’re from one of those countries or cultures, you might want to consider where you decided to post your implication that a 13 year old boy (who you know nothing about) engaged in meaningfully consensual sex with a 19 year old (who you also know nothing about) before whingeing about being the victim of a witch hunt there.
But by all means, keep digging yourself into that hole by crying that poor misunderstand you has found yourself surrounded by a mob of provincial prudes here on BoingBoing.
12 Likes
Most of the time not, indeed. That’s why it’s a good thing those laws exist. But there are exceptions (at least one, they are by now married for about 20 years). It’s not always black and white. My wife had a boyfriend of nearly 19 when she was (just) 14, so about 1 year less age difference. And yes, they had sex. And then after a few months he wanted to introduce her to his parents and she bailed (lucky for me). The laws are black and white (as they should be or they would be unenforceable). Reality isn’t. And this is not in some backwards country in the bush.
And if that means I’m a pedo-by-proxy for the boingboing crowd so be it.
You do realize that just because something happened, doesn’t mean it’s right… right?
13 Likes
When a legal adult has sex with a person below the age of legal consent, then it’s a crime. It should be treated as such. That means if you are 20 and have sex with a 15 year old, you’re in trouble. “She looked 18”?? Too bad.
Having established that…Just because someone says that you did it nine years ago does not make it true. That’s for a jury to decide.
A good litmus test for how someone really feels about civil rights and due process is their opinion about whether the same protections should be afforded to an accused child molester or rapist as are offered to an accused burglar or carjacker or terrorist.
I don’t believe anyone here has suggested that Sheen should be imprisoned without due process.
12 Likes
By, “a bit scary” do you mean you were scared? Like you felt fear?
If you defended a 19-year-old plying a 13-year-old to have sex using drugs in an in person discussion with strangers - that I would imagine could get scary.
It’s for a jury to decide whether you are going to be convicted of a crime or not. It is for each of us to decide what we believe about the situation. Just like we made judgments about people doing shitty things that aren’t criminal when there’s never even going to be a jury. I doubt Sheen will ever face a jury for this incident. This isn’t a case of someone saying someone did something to them 9 years ago. This is a case of the National Enquirer saying that someone said that someone told them that someone did something to them 33 years ago. The idea that we are against due process and rule of law if we have opinions about Charlie Sheen seems to be a stretch to me.
12 Likes
What the fuck is going on in Texas?
No guys. HE WAS A 13 YEAR OLD CHILD that was MANIPULATED AND USED by an adult. THAT IS WHY IT IS ILLEGAL IN THIS COUNTRY> And sex with a CHILD is RAPE!
3 Likes
…and it’s hard to let go of, because you know it’s gonna smack you in the face.
7 Likes
That’s a very apt joke here. I rationally know that by trying to explain my opinion(*) I only dig deeper in the hole, but it’s so very hard to just sit still when you get clobbered each time.
(*) But it’s a useful discussion. I’m re-evaluating my opinion on this matter because maybe (probably) my own experience from the past was a statistical outlier. Having been on ‘their side’ (and defending her decisions against other people) when I was a kid, I never really questioned my feelings on the subject after because the situation never arose.
Has BoingBoing fallen so far that they now report stories on National Enquirer as TRUE NEWS? Really? I’ll have to reassess BoingBoing as a resource.
TQQdles™
2 Likes
Yeah the national enquirer being the source here makes it somewhat less credible than “markov chain random text generator produces the sentence ‘charlie sheen is a rapist’”. Shame on BB.
Both absolutely correct.
Now suppose that Sheen is never charged with anything, or that he is charged and not convicted. What should happen to him?? Should he be blacklisted??
Note that if he admits to this or other sexual abuse such as Spacey did, that would change the whole picture.
No way. Rock Hudson was way out of Jim Nabor’s league.
8 Likes
People can do things that are legal that others find reprehensible and wish to have no further interaction with them all the time.
It doesn’t make it a blacklist just because people think you’re scum and have no redeeming values.
7 Likes
So help me out here: has anyone other than the National Enquirer come forward to finger Charlie Sheen as the rapist? I mean, that well has been pretty thoroughly poisoned, and Charlie Sheen has been in their sights for some time, so I don’t think I can process this.
I know, I know, I was one of those who gave Kevin Spacey the benefit of doubt until the evidence grew to be too much, but come on: this is the frickin’ National Enquirer!
3 Likes
Good rule of thumb for opinions and life, if you aren’t really sure how you yourself even feel or what you really think… then you haven’t thought about it enough to have much argument. This goes for everything, even things you never thought to think about.
1 Like
