<p>Sexually abusing a teenager is a less serious crime if the girl is not a virgin, Italy’s highest court said in a ruling. The court ruled in favor of a man who forced his 14-year-old stepdaughter to have oral sex with him and appealed a prison sentence of 40 months, arguing that the fact that the girl had had sex with other men should have been taken into consideration at his trial as a mitigating factor. The court agreed, saying that because of the victim’s previous sexual experiences, her “personality, from a sexual point of view,” was more developed and that therefore the damage to her was less than if she had been a virgin. The decision, which drew a barrage of criticism, opened the way for the stepfather to get a lighter sentence. (REUTERS)</p>
<p>Shocking. Sexual abuse is sexual abuse! And of a child no less. What does someone’s sexual history have to do with it? Even more so for a child! Very disturbing how a court could ever decide in this way.</p>
<p>Unfortunately the kinds of judicial minds that come up with their convoluted thinking tend to come from the Left side. Guess which party is opposing toughening up child molestation laws in California? Their reasoning - the justice system is corrupt, so let’s let everyone go.</p>
<p>Big Green, the Vermont story is not along the same vein. That story had the problem of not a long enough sentence in terms of punishment which was tied to reasoning to do with treatment. The case needed more sufficient punishment/incarceration but the issue of treatment is also important. Unfortunately the ruling was not a good one because it did not require enough incarceration as punishment. The rationale about treatment, however, is also important. Both were needed. Also, the fact that the incarceration ruling was too light and received such public outcry, as well as government reaction, shows that this wasn’t acceptable.</p>
<p>Same vein to me. A judicial system that cares more about the perpetrator than the victim. I’ve seen few studies that show - short of castration - any effective treatment for child molesters.</p>
<p>Big Green, believe me, I’m into victim’s rights. Stringent incarceration for sexual abuse to children must happen. I think before someone is released, treatment is necessary. It may not prevent recurrence but prison alone without some treatment for those who are released is not the only answer. You are right that many of these perpetrators are never cured of this behavior.</p>
<p>this shouldn’t be about “women” or “men” but about justice and what’s right - do we really have to segment things down to gender, race, etc. when we’re talking about doing what’s right to protect an individual.</p>
<p>It is about women and men, it was a male judge with an antiquated and sexist view, and frankly in societies where women do not have much influence in government, this way of thinking is often the norm</p>
<p>At least they didn’t stone the poor girl for disgracing the family as happens in a lot of male dominated societies</p>
<p>Big Green, you are right that it is about justice. It would be a violation if a male child was molested. So, that’s the issue. </p>
<p>But I have to agree with Citygirlsmom that I can’t imagine any woman making the distinction about the issue as to whether the victim was a virgin or not. The distinction over that is a sexist one. Obviously many men would agree with women who are outraged at such a distinction. But I can’t imagine a single woman who would have aligned with the antiquated sexist view that this judge held.</p>
<p>What’s also very sad with regard to the Italian case cited in the OP’s first post is that the step-father’s own attitudes and relationship with his step daughter may have been a strong contributing factor to the girl’s own sexual activity.</p>
<p>Yes, it is just as bad when a boy is molested. THere is that attitude, well, its a male, so what harm? Well, there is lots of harm.</p>
<p>Imagine being that girl, stepping up, going to court, doing what she needed to do, and getting her own behaviour thrown back at her as an excuse for her pig of a stepdad</p>
<p>And, my question is, how do they know she is not a “virgin” and if she had relations with adult men, are they to be charged?</p>
<p>This thread has lit a fire under me to reference one thing that really bothers me - Sex Offender Registries.</p>
<p>Before you read the rest, understand that I have three children, the youngest of which is 13, and I understand why people would want to know if someone convicted of a sexually related crime lives in their neighborhood. I also understand the high percentage of recidivism among sex offenders.</p>
<p>However, it really bothers my sense of justice that someone who has been convicted of criminal sexual conduct, served time in a penal institution and is subsequently released is then put on these lists, even after their probationary period has expired. What other type of crime warrants this attention, post-release. Murder - no, bank robbery - no, theft - no, mayhem - no, etc. It has always struck me as “mark of Cain” type justice.</p>
<p>Clearly this is a conflict between societal interests and the individual’s right to privacy. I just have a problem reconciling them.</p>
<p>Sexuality and the sexual act - require choice, choice, choice - no pressure, no force, no abuse of relative power - or harm is done.</p>
<p>Any adult realizes that tender psyches can be, and often are, warped permanently by abusing a family or other trusted relationship for the sake of the adult’s gratification. No excuses.</p>
<p>One of the parent job description tasks is: “do everything in your power to ensure that your child avoids having his sexuality hijacked by anybody.”</p>
<p>I don’t have a problem per se with the registries, as was noted, there is a high degree of recidivism in child molesters and sexual predators. They do need the book thrown at them plus counseling.</p>
<p>I do have a problem with 18 year old boys being labeled and put on the list for dating younger, consenting girls when their parents get mad. That is unfair as they are tagged for life. </p>
<p>But overall, few are sent to jail for a long time unless someone is actually hurt badly physically. The psychic wounds don’t seem to count much in many courts. It certainly has improved in the US in general. </p>
<p>But overseas, even in seemingly sophisticated EU countries, this is not an uncommon story (the first one in Italy). In India, men still burn girls who have been raped or molested as they sully the family name. There are still sexual slaves out there and other even more horrid situations. Our worldview is not the whole worldview. But women are making progress from where we were even 25 years ago.</p>
<p>The part people are missing is that the judge said because this 14 year old child had sex with other men, that what her step father did wasn’t so bad for her, if for instance she had been a virgin</p>
<p>in the article it said she had sex with other MEN, not boys, so who are those MEN, and an 18 year old is a man, a 14 year old is a child</p>
<p>Just type in your address, and hit the “map” button. I learned there is a registered sex offender three streets over!!! I realize the position of some that feel this is unfair to mark this crime in particular, but when you have children to protect, this is the sort of knowledge you want to have. Very high incidence of repeat crimes with this particular bunch. Damage to children is permanent emotionally - No time to be PC.</p>