It's a good question and, at a fundamental level, I think it has to do with the way in which we think about sexual intercourse. We tend to see the male, whose role is penetrative, as being dominant, while the woman is regarded as being more passive.
With those two foundational concepts in mind, you can begin to see how a male's rape of a female is seen in terms of violation, physical intrusion and so forth. A boy, who needs to have an erection in order to have intercourse, gives the impression of a less coercive and intrusive form of intercourse. There is an implied sense that he is, at some point (presumably when erect and penetrating the woman), a willing partner.
There is a double standard being applied here, without doubt, and I think it has a great to do with the ways in which we think about the gender roles involved in heterosexual sexual intercourse. Personally, I think the penalties should be the same.
Edit: An additional complication to this issue is that of the physiological reaction of males to continued sexual stimulation. That is, a man can be induced to have an erection even against his will. This is a particularly counter intuitive concept, given the way we are used to thinking about males and sexual desire. It is, however, well documented in instances of homosexual male rape that victims may achieve an erection and even ejaculate - the same physiological response that occurs when a male is hanged! This has nothing to do with sexual excitement but is a physiological response. Problematically, it can be sometimes inferred from this physiological phenomenon that there has been some kind of consent when, in fact, the victim has been incapable by reason of age, social position, or mental capacity to give any such consent. This is often one of the implied mitigating factors in instances where heterosexual rape is committed by women, particularly with boys. Again, I would say this implied consent is incorrect but it is an example of the way in which our intuitive and cultural responses can run completely counter to the facts of the matter.
2007-11-10 22:53:46
·
answer #1
·
answered by chris m 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
These women are sometimes young themselves and I guess that when they are placed in high-school, they try to relive the time they loved more than anything. Well for me high-school was the best years. I think that young teachers should be placed in an elementary type setting and let the old ladies teach the high school kids (JK). I graduated in 98 and there was talk about a teacher who was having sex with a lot of the football players, but it was just rumors bc nothing was done about it.
2016-04-03 07:18:11
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It depends how old the students are. if they are under 16 then men and woman are treated the same. the media focus more on males because kind of like stereo typing males are stronger and more forceful, but woman can do exactly the same as me to young children.
2007-11-10 22:52:32
·
answer #3
·
answered by Larry 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
thinking about some of my female teachers, i would'nt conplaine, in fact if it wos ofered as a reward 4 good grades i wouldnt hav a speling problemxz.
2007-11-10 23:15:22
·
answer #4
·
answered by general_pain_in_the_ass_1 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
i myself was raped by 22 years old woman when i was only 7.
2007-11-11 03:53:17
·
answer #5
·
answered by jammal 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
makes me wish I was young again
2007-11-10 23:09:24
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
As long as you have a pecker, you will be thought of as a skirt chasing sexaholic.
2007-11-10 22:58:32
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
yes, in manty fields, men are on looser side, and this is one of them.
2007-11-10 22:51:52
·
answer #8
·
answered by Rana 7
·
0⤊
1⤋