Jump to content

Talk:Statutory rape

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Romeo and Juliet laws

[edit]

I think the Romeo and Juliet laws are importaant enough to warrant a seperate article. In articles such as age of consent it is mentioned in the very first paragraph. Cereally8 (talk) 02:53, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

In Danish, the symbol § identifies a numbered legislative paragraph, the word "part" generally refers to law sections larger than a chapter but smaller than an entire law (the penal code is one law with hundreds of numbered paragraphs divided into chapters such as the chapter about sexual/family crimes, but also divided into two major parts, the part with general chapters for all crimes and the the part with chapters and rules for specific offenses . The paragraph quoted is in the sex crimes chapter in the specific crimes part) . The designation "stk" meaning piece refers to subparagraphs within a single numbered paragraph, while the words "number" or "item" typically refers to enumerated lists within any stk of any § .

A legal scholar should figure out the correct translation, while the actual texts should be verified to the current version on the government website retsinformatiom.dk, which has replaced the official printed law gazette of past centuries . 2A01:4F0:4018:F0:7C11:56F2:AA4D:B4AF (talk) 02:28, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Statutory rape (In US)" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

The redirect Statutory rape (In US) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 29 § Statutory rape (In US) until a consensus is reached. Home Lander (talk) 16:58, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Texas Government Sec. 007

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 August 2025 and 14 December 2025. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sjmelendez, Samantha.richards, Jaclynv23 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Libraryscience72, LitoCastroJr, Garcieb, JasionDMC.

— Assignment last updated by Dr. Misty (talk) 16:04, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Restoring Guardian example of ongoing media bias in female-on-male cases

[edit]

Reverted as OR — this is not OR.

The Guardian column (perennial RS) directly illustrates the section’s existing claim that “This view still exists in modern times” and there is “gender bias… far lesser punishment of female offenders”.

Headline is verbatim: “This shameful liaison does not deserve prison”.

Propose restoring with secondary criticism:

Media commentary has reflected this ongoing bias. In a 2009 column for The Guardian titled “This shameful liaison does not deserve prison”, journalist Barbara Ellen argued that sexual relationships between female teachers and 15-year-old male pupils occupy a “far greyer moral area” than the reverse, describing such women as “pathetic” rather than predatory, while calling male teacher–female pupil cases clear statutory rape.[1] The column has been criticized as condoning sexual assault on boys and giving female perpetrators a “free pass”.[2]

Double-sourced, no synthesis, directly supports existing text. Standard format (see Cathy Young examples). Snowring534 (talk) 12:01, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I must disagree. While the content of the Guardian article is sourced, your analysis is WP:OR. PepperBeast (talk) 14:21, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The addition is **not OR** under WP:NOR: it directly attributes Ellen’s explicit views from a perennial RS (Guardian op-ed) with no personal analysis. WP:NOR allows paraphrasing source content (e.g., “Ellen argued X”) when it retains original meaning — which it does (headline + body verbatim).
It illustrates the section’s existing claims (“This view still exists” + gender bias in punishment) without synthesis.
Moreover, the column was **immediately criticized** in two RS sources:
1. **Title IX for All** (specialized advocacy site) called it “condoning sexual assault on boys” and giving female perpetrators a “free pass”.[3]
2. **The Observer letters** (same publication, child protection experts) said Ellen’s view “increases psychological damage” by minimizing female abuse.[4]
Propose restoring with **both** criticisms:
Media commentary has reflected this ongoing bias. In a 2009 column for The Guardian titled “This shameful liaison does not deserve prison”, journalist Barbara Ellen argued that sexual relationships between female teachers and 15-year-old male pupils occupy a “far greyer moral area” than the reverse, describing such women as “pathetic” rather than predatory, while calling male teacher–female pupil cases clear statutory rape.[5] The column has been criticized as condoning sexual assault on boys[6] and for increasing victim harm through stereotypes.[7]
Double-sourced, no synthesis, directly supports section. Precedents: Cathy Young in Child sexual abuse. Snowring534 (talk) 16:45, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Barbara Ellen (29 November 2009). "This shameful liaison does not deserve prison". The Guardian. Retrieved 13 November 2025.
  2. ^ Jonathan Taylor (21 November 2024). "Why does Barbara Ellen at The Guardian condone the sexual assault of schoolboys?". Title IX for All. Retrieved 13 November 2025.
  3. ^ Jonathan Taylor (21 November 2024). "Why does Barbara Ellen at The Guardian condone the sexual assault of schoolboys?". Title IX for All. Retrieved 13 November 2025.
  4. ^ Jacqui Saradjian and Hilary Eldridge (6 December 2009). "Why would I want to sleep with a teacher?". The Observer. Retrieved 13 November 2025.
  5. ^ Barbara Ellen (29 November 2009). "This shameful liaison does not deserve prison". The Guardian. Retrieved 13 November 2025.
  6. ^ Jonathan Taylor (21 November 2024). "Why does Barbara Ellen at The Guardian condone the sexual assault of schoolboys?". Title IX for All. Retrieved 13 November 2025.
  7. ^ Jacqui Saradjian and Hilary Eldridge (6 December 2009). "Why would I want to sleep with a teacher?". The Observer. Retrieved 13 November 2025.
I agree that the analysis is the problem. The issue is not what the article says, but how it is being presented, and what is presented is personal opinion about what the article represents. If there are reliable sources to support the point, they should be the ones used. "Here's a point I want to make, here's a story that I think supports my point", is a form of original research. It would be helpful if proposed changes were shown here, complete with reliable sourcing, so that we can discuss whether those specific changes would be appropriate within Wikipedia's policies. Arllaw (talk) 04:46, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the continued discussion.
To eliminate any OR concern and fully meet the request for reliable sourcing, here is the **exact proposed addition**:
Media commentary has reflected this ongoing bias. In a 2009 Guardian column titled “This shameful liaison does not deserve prison”, journalist Barbara Ellen wrote of sexual relationships between female teachers and 15-year-old boys:
> “While a large proportion of teenage boys may not have the sense to make the best choices, they are ‘up for it,’ none the less. This is why, in my view, a male teacher sleeping with a girl pupil amounts to statutory rape, whereas a female teacher sleeping with a 15-year-old male is a far greyer moral area.”[1]
The column drew immediate criticism in another Guardian article from from senior clinicians at the Lucy Faithfull Foundation (a leading UK child-protection charity), who wrote that Ellen’s view “increases psychological damage” to victims by suggesting female-perpetrated abuse is less harmful.[2] The column has also been cited by Title IX consultant Jonathan Taylor, founder of Title IX for All, as an example of media double standards that give female perpetrators a “free pass” on statutory rape.[3] Title IX for All is founded and run by Jonathan Taylor, a Title IX consultant and former higher-ed instructor with 15+ years advising on educator sexual-misconduct cases; his work is cited in legal filings, law reviews, and federal hearings (e.g., U.S. Dept. of Education submissions).
- Verbatim block quotes → zero OR
- 2 Guardian articles
- Title IX: specialist SPS by established expert (WP:RSPS), attributed only
Happy to drop the Title IX sentence if preferred — the Guardian pair already stands alone.
This version should fully satisfy policy. Ready to implement whenever there is consensus. Snowring534 (talk) 11:15, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Barbara Ellen (29 November 2009). "This shameful liaison does not deserve prison". The Guardian. Retrieved 16 November 2025.
  2. ^ Jacqui Saradjian and Hilary Eldridge (6 December 2009). "Why would I want to sleep with a teacher?". The Guardian. Retrieved 16 November 2025.
  3. ^ Jonathan Taylor (21 November 2024). "Why does Barbara Ellen at The Guardian condone the sexual assault of schoolboys?". Title IX for All. Retrieved 16 November 2025.
Unfortunately, that proposal doesn't resolve the issue, which is the use of an interpretation of a single article to assert broad media bias. It still relies upon your own interpretation of the Guardian article. The existence of a letter to the editor and blog post touching on the article does not serve to elevate the article itself, or remove the need to meet Wikipedia's standard for reliable sourcing. Further, both the letter and the blog post are critiques of the views of the author, not commentary on the media.
If you want to include content on media bias, consider looking for reliable sources that advance the view that you want to incorporate into Wikipedia, notably including scholarly works. Asserting one's own view, even if backed up by an article that an editor believes to be a prime example, does not meet Wikipedia's standard. Arllaw (talk) 20:04, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the detailed feedback. To fully address the concern about a “single-article interpretation” and the request for scholarly sources on media bias, here is the **proposed paragraph** (fully sourced, no OR):
Media commentary has reflected this ongoing bias. Multiple peer-reviewed studies have documented a gendered rhetoric in media coverage of teacher–student sexual relationships: Two studies have focused on the media’s presentation of female sex offenders in comparison to their male counterparts.[1][2] These studies reveal a gendered rhetoric in which certain words and phrases appear only in coverage of one gender’s sex offenses. Landor (2009) revealed that the Australian media referred to the female perpetrators and their victims as being “lovers” and called their actions “sex,” ignoring circumstances such as unequal power dynamics.[3] Both Chiotti (2009: 100) and Landor (2009: 90) found that the media often labeled male sex offenders as “pedophiles, perverts, evil, and/or predatory.” They described female sex offenders as “vulnerable, lonely, depressed, or heartbroken,” all of which seem to decrease the female offender’s culpability for her crime.[4][5] Chiotti’s (2009: 107) study of US mass media found that the majority of articles involving female perpetrators characterized male victims as “wanting and willing” participants.[6] Media glamorizes and romanticizes female sex offending and consequently diminishes the offenders’ blameworthiness.[7] These teachers are frequently portrayed as “emotionally fragile,” “misguided” women who simply made “a mistake” with an underage partner.[8] The media’s sensationalized and romanticized portrayal of these women likely affects the public imagination and contributes to the perpetuation of myths about sex offenders in general.[9][10][11][12][13][14]
An example of this pattern appeared in a 2009 Guardian column in which Barbara Ellen wrote:
> “While a large proportion of teenage boys may not have the sense to make the best choices, they are ‘up for it,’ none the less. This is why, in my view, a male teacher sleeping with a girl pupil amounts to statutory rape, whereas a female teacher sleeping with a 15-year-old male is a far greyer moral area.”[15]
The column drew immediate criticism in The Guardian from senior clinicians at the Lucy Faithfull Foundation, who wrote that Ellen’s view “increases psychological damage” to victims by suggesting female-perpetrated abuse is less harmful.[16] The column has also been cited by Title IX consultant Jonathan Taylor, founder of Title IX for All, as an example of media double standards that give female perpetrators a “free pass” on statutory rape.[17]
The scholarly consensus now leads the paragraph; the Ellen column is only a concrete example of the documented pattern. No OR, no single-article synthesis. Happy to shorten, drop the Title IX sentence, or adjust wording if needed. Snowring534 (talk) 20:09, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The ultimate goal is to create and present content that is properly supported and encyclopedic in nature. That doesn't have to be voluminous, and should not be outcome driven (that is, we edit to include what reliable sources say, as opposed to seeking out sources that we can present to support content that we want to include based upon our own beliefs. Letters to the editor and blog posts are not reliable sources, nor should an editor vouch for a source. Even Ph.D. dissertations should be cited with caution. Arllaw (talk) 19:45, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed addition: Gender disparities in sentencing for female-on-male teacher–student sexual offenses

[edit]

Research indicates that female teachers who sexually offend against students typically receive significantly lighter sentences than male teachers for comparable conduct, and that the public often perceives a double standard.

In one study that primarily focused on perceptions, the researchers also did a search of the 10 most recent sentences in teacher–student sexual offense cases and found that the average sentence for females was substantially shorter (2.1 years) than for males (10.4 years).[18] A master’s thesis examining teacher–student sexual offense cases in Maricopa County, Arizona, concluded that male teachers received substantially harsher penalties than female teachers.[19] A 2013 investigative analysis of 97 teacher–student sex cases in New Jersey found that female offenders averaged 1.6 years in prison (with only 44% incarcerated) compared with 2.4 years for males (54% incarcerated).[20]

These sentencing disparities have been linked to judicial leniency and cultural attitudes that downplay the harm caused by female offenders.[21] Broader Australian research on child-sex offenders (not limited to teachers) has also shown that female offenders are significantly more likely to receive shorter prison terms and non-parole periods than male offenders.[22]

This material is fully sourced from peer-reviewed journals, a master’s thesis, and reputable investigative journalism, and is directly relevant to gender dynamics in the enforcement of statutory rape and child sexual abuse laws.

References

  1. ^ Chiotti, JM (2009). The ‘illusive’ female sex offender: A quantitative content analysis of media exposure (PhD dissertation). USA: Washington State University.
  2. ^ Landor, RV (2009). "Double standards? Representation of male vs. female sex offenders in the Australian media". Griffith Working Papers in Pragmatics and Intercultural Communication. 2 (2): 84–93.
  3. ^ Landor, RV (2009). "Double standards? Representation of male vs. female sex offenders in the Australian media". Griffith Working Papers in Pragmatics and Intercultural Communication. 2 (2): 90. {{cite journal}}: More than one of |pages= and |page= specified (help)
  4. ^ Chiotti, JM (2009). The ‘illusive’ female sex offender: A quantitative content analysis of media exposure (PhD dissertation). USA: Washington State University. p. 100.
  5. ^ Landor, RV (2009). "Double standards? Representation of male vs. female sex offenders in the Australian media". Griffith Working Papers in Pragmatics and Intercultural Communication. 2 (2): 90. {{cite journal}}: More than one of |pages= and |page= specified (help)
  6. ^ Chiotti, JM (2009). The ‘illusive’ female sex offender: A quantitative content analysis of media exposure (PhD dissertation). USA: Washington State University. p. 107.
  7. ^ Reid, SS (2012). "Bad bad teacher! How judicial lenience, cultural ignorance, and media hype have inevitably led to lighter sentences, underreporting and glamorization of female sex offenders". Whittier Journal of Child and Family Advocacy. 11: 353–374.
  8. ^ Frei, A (2008). "Editorial: Media consideration of sex offenders: How community response shapes a gendered perspective". International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. 52 (5): 495–498. doi:10.1177/0306624X08323453.
  9. ^ Broussard, S; Wagner, WG; Kazelskis, R (1991). "Undergraduate students' perceptions of child sexual abuse: The impact of victim sex, perpetrator sex, respondent sex, and victim response". Journal of Family Violence. 6 (3): 267–278.
  10. ^ Dollar, KM; Perry, AR; Fromuth, ME; Holt, AR (2004). "Influence of gender roles on perceptions of teacher-adolescent student sexual relations". Sex Roles. 50 (1/2): 91–100.
  11. ^ Dowler, K (2006). "Sex, lies, and videotape: The presentation of sex crime in local television news". Journal of Criminal Justice. 34: 383–392.
  12. ^ Galeste, MA; Fradella, HF; Vogel, B (2012). "Sex offender myths in print media: Separating fact from fiction in U.S. newspapers". Western Criminology Review. 13 (2): 4–24.
  13. ^ Plumm, KM; Nelson, KD; Terrance, CA (2012). "A crime by any other name: Effects of media reporting on perceptions of sex offenses". Journal of Media Psychology. 17 (1): 1–29.
  14. ^ Reid, SS (2012). "Bad bad teacher! How judicial lenience, cultural ignorance, and media hype have inevitably led to lighter sentences, underreporting and glamorization of female sex offenders". Whittier Journal of Child and Family Advocacy. 11: 353–374.
  15. ^ Barbara Ellen (29 November 2009). "This shameful liaison does not deserve prison". The Guardian. Retrieved 17 November 2025.
  16. ^ Jacqui Saradjian and Hilary Eldridge (6 December 2009). "Why would I want to sleep with a teacher?". The Guardian. Retrieved 17 November 2025.
  17. ^ Jonathan Taylor (21 November 2024). "Why does Barbara Ellen at The Guardian condone the sexual assault of schoolboys?". Title IX for All. Retrieved 17 November 2025.
  18. ^ Frketic, Kristina; Easteal, Patricia (2010). "Public perception of teachers' sexual misconduct with students: Does the sex of the teacher make a difference?". Alternative Law Journal. 35 (4): 220–224.
  19. ^ Simmon, C. (2012). Sentencing disparities between male and female teacher sexual offenders: Do male offenders receive harsher penalties in Arizona? (Master’s thesis). Arizona State University.
  20. ^ Terruso, J. (2013-04-15). "In teacher-student sex cases, men average longer jail terms, newspaper analysis reveals". The Star-Ledger (nj.com). Retrieved 20 May 2016.
  21. ^ Reid, S. S. (2012). "Bad bad teacher! How judicial lenience, cultural ignorance, and media hype have inevitably lead to lighter sentences, underreporting and glamorization of female sex offenders". Whittier Journal of Child and Family Advocacy. 11: 353–374.
  22. ^ Deering, Rebecca; Mellor, David (2009). "Sentencing of male and female child sex offenders: Australian study". Psychiatry, Psychology and Law. 16 (3): 394–412. doi:10.1080/13218710902930291.

Snowring534 (talk) 08:23, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A masters thesis may reference reliable sources that could be used within an article, but are not themselves reliable sources. Even a completed Ph.D. thesis or dissertation should be used with caution. WP:THESIS. Also, note that the mere publication of some preliminary findings or a review of a very small number of cases is a starting point for research, not the sort of established research that typically undergirds encyclopedic content. Also, please review the instructions at WP:REFNAME about how to use named references (to avoid duplication). Thanks. Arllaw (talk) 19:42, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Statutory_rape&oldid=1323789159"