Shelby: And that’s probably a lot smarter.
Vic: You’re once again arguing semantics, and wrongly. That’s what arbitrary means to you. It is not what it means in popular parlance and everyone else understands that. Since your argument is based on that, premise everything else just sort of falls apart.
Your claims to 18 as a standard have similarly already been refuted elsewhere in the thread, so I see no reason to revisit it.
I’m trying to understand your point (points?) in the last two paragraphs, because it seems like it’s interesting, but it’s kind of convoluted. Are you claiming that in the boy’s case he was prosecuted and the girl wasn’t because he should have known better? I so, no… that’s simply not true, and the cops have since dropped the case because they know that they’re in wrong on the double standard and the implementation of their investigation. So you’re literally on your own there. Also, if I’m understanding you correctly (and i really may not be) you’re completely refuting your final point (the last paragraph) by arguing so.
Laura: All very fair criticism. From what stories are saying, she clearly handled the situation badly. There’s no doubt that disregarding court orders is dumb, for instance. But I don’t know if I believe she’s a predatory asshole. I mean, she certainly might be. But that feels like one spin. The other spin being that she’s a nice innocent girl who’s being completely railroaded. And I don’t believe that either. In all likelihood, I think she’s just a dumb teenager. And but for her sexual preference and some the unbalanced laws on age of consent, no one would have cared about this at all.
So yeah, she’s by means a poster child (certainly not as much as the kid with the penis injection case), I still think her situation calls interesting questions on the law in general.