Raped by family friend

• <Precious>

  23 Jul 06, 10:47

  Tsk! Tsk! Don't you fellas out there know that having sex with a minor is an offence - Statutory Rape - for which the consent of the minor is irrelevant?
  
• hiphop2009

  23 Jul 06, 11:34

  Originally posted by :

  Tsk! Tsk! Don't you fellas out there know that having sex with a minor is an offence - Statutory Rape - for which the consent of the minor is irrelevant?
  

  this is one of the most trickiest law and policy in singapore. we have two scenario, first:
  
  wad if the girl, who is under the age of 16, actually gives consent to the guy for sex. for this case, the girl willingly agrees to it and may even asked for sex from the guy at first. we all know under the age of 16, whether the the girl consent or not, having sex with her constitute as statutory rape.so the thing is this, if the girl agrees, and the guy do it, why have the poor guy be punished?
  
  second:
  
  does this law effectively protect girls?...as we know, girls under the age of 16 maybe immature in their thinking and act rashly, thus this law is the prevent guys from having sex from minors so as the protect the girls. one paradox is, the girl agrees, the guy do it but still get punished, on the other hand, we want to protect girls from such harm. can we ever acheive a balance on dat?
  
  
• hoganrock

  23 Jul 06, 21:23

  Originally posted by hiphop2009:

  this is one of the most trickiest law and policy in singapore. we have two scenario, first:
  
  wad if the girl, who is under the age of 16, actually gives consent to the guy for sex. for this case, the girl willingly agrees to it and may even asked for sex from the guy at first. we all know under the age of 16, whether the the girl consent or not, having sex with her constitute as statutory rape.so the thing is this, if the girl agrees, and the guy do it, why have the poor guy be punished?
  
  second:
  
  does this law effectively protect girls?...as we know, girls under the age of 16 maybe immature in their thinking and act rashly, thus this law is the prevent guys from having sex from minors so as the protect the girls. one paradox is, the girl agrees, the guy do it but still get punished, on the other hand, we want to protect girls from such harm. can we ever acheive a balance on dat?
  
  

  so which law is better?
• Urroh

  24 Jul 06, 12:05

  Originally posted by hoganrock:

  so which law is better?

  THe rule is not to have sex with gals under 16 then you will be safe..
  
  Just dun do it..
• Disappointment

  24 Jul 06, 12:28

  I think the policy makers should review this law.
  I think its quite unfair that the law only protect the girl's interests, but not the guy's one.
  
  I mean we had read several reports that female minor having sexs and ask for favors later. If the guy dun agreed, she threatened to report to the police about being rape by him. Then how?
  
  I think that the police is able to investigate that if it is rape. There maybe bruises here and there. But if it is consenual. Dun you think that both parties must bear some responsiblilities for breaking the law???
• tortoise_head

  25 Jul 06, 13:38

  ever heard the cry-wolf story?
  some gals cry rape when they themselves wana have fun...
  gals just wana have fun....
• karn123

  25 Jul 06, 13:49

  Lock the boys up.
• hoganrock

  25 Jul 06, 21:49

  Originally posted by tortoise_head:

  ever heard the cry-wolf story?
  some gals cry rape when they themselves wana have fun...
  gals just wana have fun....

  
• sgheartland

  26 Jul 06, 08:39

  i think lock-up not enough, must kena rotan.
• SGpork

  26 Jul 06, 09:59

  poor girl...
  no eye read..