What if a group of women jumped a man or held a gun to his head. Physical rape of a man can be achieved by women.
Plus, we are talking about women raping 14 - 16 year old boys!

 

Indeed, it is physically possible, however, we are not talking about rape.

 

OK...this is getting interesting. Let's just focus on the physical aspect for a moment. Am I the only one who thinks it would be physically possible for a woman to rape a man? I mean..sure, the guy would probably have to be tied down or something, but I believe it could happen. Guys can be physically excited even when they truely don't want to be.
Now if it's a big ugly chick and she points a gun at me and tells me to "perform", she might as well shoot me because it ain't happening.

 

Very good point and you are 100% correct. We got a little sidetracked, but it was interesting to discuss.

 

If the woman took something and inserted something into the boys against their will. Then that would probably be viewed different. If she was some old ugly haggard that kidnapped boys, and took them home to a torture chamber, that would be viewed equal to the classic "evil man vs. innocent young woman" rape.

But I imagine, the teacher said "I'd like to talk to you after class", then the boy did, she said something like "wanna do it with me?". Immediate hard-on. and the boy then actively pursued it. Not exactly rape-rape*.

*When me and you hear the phrase "she was raped". We think of clear cut brutality, probably a woman physically restrained(maybe beat up too) in a dark alley and then forced against her will. and maybe left for dead.

But when me or you or a jury hear about something that isn't half as bad as this situation, still being called "rape", it really weakens the term.
I'm not at all saying it's right, and i've debated ppl each and everytime this b.s. happens, but I think it shouldn't be called "rape" if the scenario i put forth is too.

 

Going with your example, even if she was simply kinda attractive, most likely it would be "game on". But I dont see it as rape myself.

 

I believe it is possible for a woman to rape a man. It is not just a question of will power.

And if a BUC held a gun on me and said "Dance fat boy", you can bet I'd not be trying to balance my checkbook.

 

Whenever it's a kid (willing or not) it's called rape because the idea is that they are too young to make the decision.

 

And it should be called rape in that situation... the kids are defenseless....Until they reach the age of consent, they should be protected to the fullest extent possible. Because, face it, these kids will be scarred for life.

 

That brings up another point. If the woman was attractive, she might be more likely to coax the necessary physical reaction from the man...even though he still does not want to (wants to remain faithful to wife...whatever). But if she's ugly, it's probably not going to happen. Men are visually stimulated.

 

well I lost my virginity at 14. my gf at 14 too. I guess we "raped" each other for a good year and a half. Certain kids are more mature about situations like that then others(believe i went to a christian high school for a while, those kids were very socially immature).

Earlier at 14, I almost got with my friend's 21 year old sister. and she was fine too, had her own car, apt. job. just got of beauty school. You may think she was a rapist by those standards, but at 14, I was 6'1" and hung out with kids anywhere from 15-20. She knew I was younger, but soon as she found out i was only a day older than her little brother she didn't. Would she really have been a rapist, if she had?

 

You're right, but we aren't discussing whether or not it's rape. We are discussing the inequities in the law that slap a female teacher on the wrist for having relations of any kind with a male student vs the Male teachers that get thrown in pound them in the butt prison for dozens of years for pursuing the EXACT same CONSENSUAL relationship with a female student.

 

But what is a "kid"? Here in the States, we say 18.

But in quite a few countries in Europe its 15.

Romeo and Juliet were married when she was, what, 13?

Age should not be the real issue, but maturity.

 

Is there a quantifiable scale, other than age, for 'maturity'?

 

I say that inequality is a way of life. Not saying its right, and Im not saying its wrong. It simply IS. To me, there is no debating that.

 

By the letter of the law..yes.

 

So we should accept it and move on? Back of the bus, seperate but equal, white only lunch counters? What if we had just accepted that?

 

No, that is why we average out an age.... the child should be able to comprehend this action at this age......

 

Without laws, there would be no need for a scale.

Now dont jump on me all at once. Situations are always different. But if a 17 year and an 18 year old got together and had consensual sex, is there really a crime?

 

Again, I am not taking sides. I am just presenting the facts. If its a fight you want to take up, more power to you.