Canadian Supreme Court finds it’s not rape if the boy looks older

Oh Canada. It seems that every few months I come across another head-slapping instance of utter stupidity. The most recent case deals with the acquittal of a woman accused of raping a 14-year-old boy. Barbara George knew the victim through her son. She assumed the victim was older because he looked and acted “mature”.

According to an article:

Their sexual activity took place after the complainant entered George’s bedroom, along with George’s 14-year-old daughter, during a teenage party involving drinking at her home. The daughter eventually left, but the complainant and George, who were both not drinking, spoke alone for several hours. The trial judge found as a fact that the complainant initiated their first kiss and the sexual intercourse that followed. He also found as a fact that George, although “reluctant at first,” was a willing participant in the sexual intercourse that followed the kissing.

The appellant did not find out the boy’s age until months later when she asked her son.

If that sounds very convenient that is because it likely is something the woman concocted as a defense. Granted, it is entirely possible that she did not know the boy’s age. However, Canadian law is pretty clear on that matter:

Mistake of age

(4) It is not a defence to a charge under section 151 or 152, subsection 160(3) or 173(2), or section 271, 272 or 273 that the accused believed that the complainant was 16 years of age or more at the time the offence is alleged to have been committed unless the accused took all reasonable steps to ascertain the age of the complainant.

Based on George’s statements, she made no attempt to confirm the boy’s age until well after the incident. So this should be a moot point.

But of course, this is a woman in Canada and the Canadian government is abjectly against prosecuting and convicting women of abusing children no matter what the law states. So of course the judge acquitted George based on the claim that George did not know the boy’s age:

The Crown argued at the Supreme Court that the trial judge misinterpreted s. 150.1(4). “Instead of considering whether the appellant had taken all reasonable steps to ascertain the boy’s age, the trial judge focused on whether there was an objective basis for her belief the boy was old enough to have sex with,” the Crown argued in its factum.

“Instead of asking whether she had taken all reasonable steps to ascertain the boy’s age, the trial judge listed reasons why a person might think the boy was 16 years or older at the time of the encounter even when some of those reasons would not have been apparent to any person at the time of the sexual encounter. Moreover, the trial judge erred by relying on evidence that was not probative or relevant to the legal test enunciated in s. 150.1(4).”

This is despite the unquestionable clarity of the law. There is really no other way to interpret it. Assuming a child’s age does not absolve one of responsibility. Even if the child lies about their age a person is still subject to prosecution if they fail to verify it.

The Crown managed to appeal the acquittal to the Supreme Court, yet the Court upheld the judge’s ruling. The members of the five-panel court released an explanation of their May decision. It is a thing to behold:

Today the Supreme Court reasoned that, “the more reasonable an accused’s perception of the complainant’s age, the fewer steps reasonably required of them.”

“In some cases, it may be reasonable to ask a partner’s age. It would be an error, however, to insist that a reasonable person would ask a partner’s age in every case,” the decision reads. “Conversely, it would be an error to assert that a reasonable person would do no more than ask a partner’s age in every case, given the commonly recognized motivation for young people to misrepresent their age.”

In short, it is perfectly okay for someone to just assume a child is of the age of consent because no reasonable person would ask the child’s age in every instance. Yet in the very next sentence they argue that simply taking the child’s word is not enough.

The explanation makes zero sense. Either a reasonable person would ask or they would not. In this particular circumstance, there was no reason for George not ask. Most parents ask questions about their children’s friends, particularly those they do not know well.

Likewise, based on her actions one could infer that she suspected the boy was not over 16. The reason George ended up in court is because she attempted to become a mounty and had to answer a question regarding sex with someone under 16. George asked her son the boy’s age and reported the answer on the application.

If George honestly believed that the boy was of legal age, her actions make no sense. She would have answered in the negative and been done with it. It seems more likely that she either suspected or knew the boy was younger.

But all of that is a moot point now. George gets away with violating the law by using an excuse the law was specifically written to address. And let us not pretend that this would have worked if the accused had been male. There are dozens of cases of men meeting underage girls in clubs and bars who still faced conviction despite having every reason to assume the girls were of age.

Yet when the perpetrator is female, any and every excuse is acceptable.

The NISVS 2010-2012 Report – Continued

In the previous part, I discussed the CDC’s general findings from the recent 2012 survey. My analysis continues below.

As I mentioned in the previous post, the CDC’s numbers have remained consistent throughout the survey’s history. While I do think the researchers are manipulating the data in regards to sexual violence, they appear to do it same way each time. For example, the researchers again found that women commit the majority of sexual violence against male victims: Continue reading

The NISVS 2010-2012 Report

The CDC released a new National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS). The survey combines data from the 2010, 2011, and 2012 numbers. Readers may notice that the most current data is from 2012, putting a five-year gap between the survey data and the current year. The researchers do not explain the delay, however, it does appear that both the 2011 and 2012 took increasingly longer periods of time to complete.

There are several things worth noting about the survey. It appears the CDC listened to the complaints about how they reported their findings. Readers may recall that in the 2010 survey the CDC repeatedly cited the rape statistics for male victims despite the “made to penetrate” victims showing a much higher prevalence rate. This resulted in skewed reporting, making it appear as if males are never victims of forcible or violent sexual assault. The researchers changed this in the current survey. They instead cite the higher “made to penetrate” rate, although this creates same problem as before (I will explain that later).

The term “made to penetrate” remains. The researchers continue to separate it from “rape” despite no one else studying, researching, or prosecuting sexual violence against males doing so. It remains as inexplicable as it was in 2011, although to the CDC’s credit they did not add in any nonsense about it not counting as rape since it is done primarily males as they did before.

The CDC again found that 1 in 3 women and 1 in 6 men experience some form of sexual violence in their lifetime. As with the previous survey, there is a higher rate of “made to penetrate” than rape among male victims. From the survey: Continue reading

Feminist proves MRAs have a point by trying to disprove that point

Everyday Feminism is precisely what is wrong with modern feminism. The writers for the site are typically so misinformed and uninformed that it is shocking they are able to construct complete sentences containing any information. The site is a view into a Fortress of Solitude-size echo chamber, complete with backpatting, groupthink,  and flat-out lies. Yet it is the condescending tone found in many article that often results in the site’s best idiotic material.

Enter Suzannah Weiss. She wrote an article titled “4 MRA Arguments That Actually Have a Point – And Where They Go Wrong“. One already knows it will be a trainwreck of ideological nonsense just from the title. The most impressive part about the article is how blind Weiss is to the nature of her own statements. As one reads through the article, she contradicts herself within one or two sentences. A simple proofread would have caught this. One would expect an editor to catch it as well. Yet Weiss readily disproves her own arguments against men’s rights activists so frequently I can only assume she typed it and posted it immediately.

The article is fairly long, so I will break it into parts in order to address them fully. Let us begin: Continue reading

Welcome to the world of double standards

Let us say a person records themselves sexually abusing their son and shares the images with another person. Who should receive the harsher sentence: the person who abused the child or the one who received the images of the abuse?

Logic and ethics would suggest that the person who had physical contact with the child should face the stiffer sentence. However, this does not apply when one adds in the sex of those involved. Such is the situation in a recent case:

A Red Deer mother and licensed daycare worker has been sentenced to three-and-a-half years in prison for using her four-year-old son to make child pornography.

The woman, 43 years old at the time she was charged, pleaded guilty to sexual assault, making child pornography and distributing child pornography.

Authorities discovered the woman while investigating Peter Allen Cash. The Idaho man had numerous videos and images of child pornography on his phone. Canadian and Idaho authorities worked together to track down one of the boys from the images, which led to the woman’s arrest. Here is where it gets odd: Continue reading

Bulletin Board v305

American childhood sexual abuse survivor holds free public seminars in Auckland — A sexual childhood abuse survivor hopes that sharing his story will help change the mindset of other sexually abused Kiwi males. Greg Holtmeyer, 51, of Missouri in the United States, is holding a closed group and a public seminar on male sexual abuse at Auckland’s Unitec in Mt Albert from May 29 to 30. New Zealand Police Data shows 624 cases of male sexual assault and related offences were reported last year.

John Robson: Why are there almost no shelters for male victims? And why is asking that question so controversial? — Do you believe that men need help today? If so, we should do lunch. Specifically, this Sunday I’ll be speaking at the opening of the Canadian Association for Equality (CAFE) Ottawa Centre for Men and Families, “Ottawa’s first multi-service hub for the health and well-being of boys, men, fathers and families.” It’s May 28, at Biagio’s Italian Kitchen on Richmond Rd. at 2:00 and I hope you’ll contribute and, if in the area, attend, because surely such a thing is desirable.

Knox County woman sentenced to 24 years in prison for abuse of stepsons — She tortured them, beat them, handcuffed them, starved them and even tried to drown them, but Jessica Cox’s stepsons gave her forgiveness and thanks on Friday. “Thank you, Jessica,” Austin McIntosh, now 20, told his stepmother as she faced sentencing in Knox County Criminal Court Friday for the months-long abuse she carried out against him and his younger brother, Justin McIntosh. “Without you, I would not be the person I am today.” Continue reading

Bulletin Board v304

Advocates, survivors say stigmas keep male victims from reporting sexual assaults — Social stigmas and a lack of understanding fuels the underreporting of sexual assaults among male victims, police and victim advocates said at a campus forum Thursday. Zac Palmer told about a dozen people at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln he didn’t realize what his longtime partner did to him was sexual assault. He only later came to terms with it, and then last summer, he was sexually assaulted by someone else while at a party with friends, he said.

Chicago Archdiocese pays $3.15 million to settle abuse suits — The Archdiocese of Chicago will pay $3.15 million to settle lawsuits brought by three men who allege they were sexually abused by a notorious former pastor of a West Side Catholic church more than a decade ago, the plaintiffs’ attorney said Wednesday. The accusers, all identified in court papers as John Doe, said former priest and convicted sex offender Daniel McCormack sexually abused them more than once during their participation in an after-school program called S.A.F.E. at Our Lady of the Westside Catholic School.

Court hears boy got himself expelled from seminary so that sex abuse by priest would stop — A catholic priest repeatedly sexually abused a young boy in his care “breaching that trust in a spectacular and horrific way,” a court heard. The boy was just 13 and 14 years old when Father Michael Higginbottom allegedly began seriously abusing him at a seminary in West Lancashire, according to prosecutors. Continue reading