Because rape isn’t rape if a 12yo ‘consents’

A 24 year old man ‘had sex’ with a 12 year old girl. He got a sentence of 2 years and 10 months, but it has been suspended.

Why? Because the child “was an enthusiastic participant in the relationship.” That’s according to the judge.

Perhaps it’s worth reminding m’lud about the law. Children.Can’t.Consent. That makes it rape. No ifs, not buts, no maybes, no excuses.

Since when is a suspended sentence appropriate when a grown man has raped a child?

Sadly, the trope is all too familiar.

And a note to the media. It’s not sex. It’s rape. Another all too familiar trope.

Update: Hoyden about Town posts on the same horrible sotry, and links to the Adelaide Advertiser article, where the word ‘rape’ is never mentioned at all.

It seems the man was ‘immature’ and sexually inexperienced. Read – he wasn’t getting any. Clearly, that meant he was entitled to take a 12 year old’s body.

2 responses to “Because rape isn’t rape if a 12yo ‘consents’

  1. There are no words…

  2. http://www.aus-city.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=41821&page=1

    and when will the media decide to report on the abuse from DOCS and Family SA??.
    When will the media decide to report on the corruption of this department.?