NSFA. Does the phrase "...had sex with..." imply a mutal consent?

Wow, I agree with you wholeheartedly. That’s the wrong choice of phrase. And a horrific story, to boot. How sick and sad.

It is unbelievably horrible….

No matter what age, “have sex with” doesn’t automatically comply consent on both parties. It means someone’s penis went into another person’s bodily orifice. It could also mean “she was asking for it, so I did her.” Some people don’t understand what consent is. Consent could be inferred by some men a woman is showing a lot of skin and is acting in a flirty manner.

….That’s semantics @BarnacleBill. There is a different emotional connotation between the words “having sex,” and “forcible rape.” Like the difference between swatting and punching.

@Dutchess_III What does NSFA mean?

Not Safe For Anywhere. : )

It implies that to me.
The way I see it, rape would be, ”forced to have sex with….”.

If I had written the report in your details, I would have said, ””...admitted to raping two girls, ages 6 and 7.”

Using it in such a fashion is at least a gross misuse in terms of lie by ommission.

There is no implied consent when having sex with a child let alone an under aged teenager who may have even said let’s do it! It’s called statutory rape and that person is a predatory sex offender.

@Cruiser I think raping a 6 year old goes FAR beyond “statutory” rape.

I definitely don’t mean to imply that what he did was ok, but I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that wording. It doesn’t imply consent to me, and sex was the act that was had with those children.

It is sort of like when politicians get caught for being the amoral, dishonest crooks that most of them are. They usually say “I made a mistake” even though they did it on purpose.

@nikipedia…. Technically that is correct, but the wording tones the act down so that it seems almost insignificant. I guess it could be comparable to a guy slaughtering 12 people and the paper reads, “He made a mistake.”

@Dutchess_III

“So you don’t think the children were forced to have sex? I guess your comment left me a little confused.”

I think the children were forced to have sex, and in that context ”...having sex with….”, means rape.

However, the main part of your question and your first detail precede that context, and my first statement attempts to answer them based on my perception that they’re exclusive of that context.

@Brian1946 “Having sex” can mean so many, many different things. Usually it is something positive and enjoyable. It can be gentle, too. “Rape” means one thing only, and it is violent. I still totally disagree with the way the paper worded it.

@Dutchess_III HS me too….just didn’t want to bog down my post with legalese.

What??? You are “You Lost Me Cruiser” right now!

@Dutchess_III I simply agreed with you that raping a child does go far beyond the confines of statutory rape.

The guy admitted that he “had sex with” them because to him, that’s what he did. He probably doesn’t see it as raping them or molesting them or any other term we can thing of for what he did.

The phrase itself means nothing about consent. It’s just an action that has been done and the choosing of such a phrase is completely up to the person saying it. When the paper published what he said, I’m guessing they were publishing his exact words, which give a good idea of where this guys mentality lies.

The guy that raped me when I was a teenager bragged to his friends that he “had sex with me”. His friends were quite shocked when they found out the truth behind what happened. He didn’t agree that what he did was rape, even though it was. It’s all a matter of perspective from the person saying it.

@Seaofclouds The guy isn’t then one who wrote the article. A reporter did. He chose to use those mild words to describe an unbelievably horrific act. If they were quoting him, A) they should have said so and B) they should have decided not to use such a stupid quote.

@Dutchess_III I know it wasn’t the guy himself that wrote the article and I agree that they could have used different words in describing the situation in the article, but when quoting what someone actually said or admitted to, it is important to use their actual words (like them or not). I’m not trying to lessen what he did in any way, just saying that what he actually admitted to/said he did is what he did in his opinion/view and that when reporting something someone said, it is important to use their words (whether they tell the whole story or not).

It is also very important to use quotation marks when you’re quoting someone. They didn’t.

Very true.

Also…. @Seaofclouds I’m so sorry about what happened. But it kind of made my point. By telling people that he “had sex” with you, he downgraded it from a violent attack to an almost inconsequential act. He gave people the idea that you agreed to it, didn’t he.

I’m really sorry that that happened to you. : ( What happened to him?

@Dutchess_III When he said that to people, sure he implied it was a mutual thing, but that’s because to him it was. He didn’t see it as a rape even though it was. That’s something I find quite interesting about his thinking (and the thinking of others like him). Interesting in a “how can they think that” kind of way because I like trying to figure out how people think.

Craziness @Seaofclouds. Strange craziness.

Anyone can use deceptive or misleading descriptions to attempt to minimize their misdeeds. It is usually a feeble attempt to rationalize their conduct for themselves. The courts and attorneys are masters of manipulating language to change the impressions others derive from what they say.

That’s exactly how I saw the article..as though they minimized the act. However, why a 3rd party reporter would do that is beyond me.