Column: Guys endure sexual double standards, too
by William P. Davis | The Maine Campus (University of Maine)
Issue date: 2/18/09 Section: Opinion
(U-WIRE) — Gender discrimination is a serious subject, and this article is in no way meant to slight the many injustices endured by women during the last centuries. The equal pay bill Obama recently signed into law, for example, is important legislation and long overdue.
That being said, one of the most egregious forms of gender discrimination is holding one gender to a double standard. Females are often held to a double standard, but so are males. Take the case of the 14-year-old boy charged with statutory rape in Plymouth County, Mass. The high school freshman had sexual encounters with three underage girls, who are not being charged.
Now, without getting into the sticky - yes, pun - subject of underage sexual exploration, it should be mentioned that all three girls were, as often is the case at that age, willing participants, and that Massachusetts law stipulates that it is illegal for all parties under the age of 16 to engage in sexual acts.
In other words, the girls have not been charged even though they broke the law just as much as the boy.
People still hold onto their beliefs that females are sexually innocent, so such actions must be the fault of the male. It is the same way people ignore the real problem of male-victim rape. Though the percentage of males who will be raped is much lower than the percentage of females who will be raped, it is a very real crime that often goes unprosecuted.
What possible justification do officials have for arresting just the underage boy and not all parties involved? The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court said the boy might have been a victim of gender discrimination. May have been? What does someone have to do to definitely be a victim? The laws were once written exclusively with girls in mind but have now been updated to protect both males and females. So why is only the boy being charged?
The prosecution says it's because the girls are younger than the boy, but I doubt that if the tables were turned—if it was an older girl and a younger boy—that the prosecution would be quite so quick or so harsh. The boy is being charged with nine crimes, including three instances of statutory rape. The prosecution is basing its case purely on predefined gender stereotypes that even women's rights groups don't support. An American Civil Liberty Union lawyer told the Boston Globe, "We should not be enforcing the law based on stereotypical notions about girls as not being capable actors in the same way that boys are."
Exactly. With equal rights comes equal liability, and all parties should be charged equally or not at all. It is laudable that the ACLU is willing to stand up for equal rights, instead of equal rights when it's convenient. Gender stereotypes and discrimination will never disappear, but such flagrant display of both in our judicial system is troubling indeed.
That being said, one of the most egregious forms of gender discrimination is holding one gender to a double standard. Females are often held to a double standard, but so are males. Take the case of the 14-year-old boy charged with statutory rape in Plymouth County, Mass. The high school freshman had sexual encounters with three underage girls, who are not being charged.
Now, without getting into the sticky - yes, pun - subject of underage sexual exploration, it should be mentioned that all three girls were, as often is the case at that age, willing participants, and that Massachusetts law stipulates that it is illegal for all parties under the age of 16 to engage in sexual acts.
In other words, the girls have not been charged even though they broke the law just as much as the boy.
People still hold onto their beliefs that females are sexually innocent, so such actions must be the fault of the male. It is the same way people ignore the real problem of male-victim rape. Though the percentage of males who will be raped is much lower than the percentage of females who will be raped, it is a very real crime that often goes unprosecuted.
What possible justification do officials have for arresting just the underage boy and not all parties involved? The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court said the boy might have been a victim of gender discrimination. May have been? What does someone have to do to definitely be a victim? The laws were once written exclusively with girls in mind but have now been updated to protect both males and females. So why is only the boy being charged?
The prosecution says it's because the girls are younger than the boy, but I doubt that if the tables were turned—if it was an older girl and a younger boy—that the prosecution would be quite so quick or so harsh. The boy is being charged with nine crimes, including three instances of statutory rape. The prosecution is basing its case purely on predefined gender stereotypes that even women's rights groups don't support. An American Civil Liberty Union lawyer told the Boston Globe, "We should not be enforcing the law based on stereotypical notions about girls as not being capable actors in the same way that boys are."
Exactly. With equal rights comes equal liability, and all parties should be charged equally or not at all. It is laudable that the ACLU is willing to stand up for equal rights, instead of equal rights when it's convenient. Gender stereotypes and discrimination will never disappear, but such flagrant display of both in our judicial system is troubling indeed.
Be the first to comment on this story