19 year olds are not arrested for sex with 17 year olds. While the age span for statutory rape depends on the state, the majority have a four year spread between the parties during which is sex is considered consensual. Thus, unlike many implications in this chain of e-mail, a 19 year old will not be prosecuted for having sex with a 17 year old. Most states consider statutory rape to have occurred when the sex is between a person eighteen years or older and a person below the age of 18 AND the minor is four years or younger than the party that has attained the age of majority. Therefore, If a seventeen year old high school senior is dating a fifteen year old sophomore, the relationship does not become illegal on the senior's 18th birthday because the sophomore is only three years younger. 18 and 14, however, would be bad news for the 18 year old.

I travelled in America for about 8 months on my "gap year" - a year between school and university.

It was about 10 years later that an American friend told me that the age of consent (i.e. the age below which sleeping with constitutes statutory rape) was 18 in the US.

Now I don't know if that limit was specific to his state, or if it's been changed - but I was thinking how easily I could have gotten into quite a lot of trouble if it was true...

Is this the case? Are 19-year-olds slapped in jail for sleeping with 17-year-olds?

in this situation are being sacrificed to politics. It is unacceptable to treat boys and girls differently and unacceptable to allow this for everyone so females can be jailed and boys subjected to reeducation, I mean therapy, when no one harmed anyone, solely to create social conditions supposedly beneficial to completely uninvolved third parties. This sort of thing should be carefully scrutinized, not casually tossed off to satify prudery or the desire of some women to keep men in line.

I have several thoughts on this topic:

First, an adult who has sex with a post-pubescent teenager who happens to be under the age of consent is not the same as one who has sex with a pre-pubescent child. The latter is fixated on a wholly inappropriate sex object; the former is attracted to a physically appropriate object of desire, in violation, however, of social and legal norms. Actual child molestation (of young children) can reasonably be presumed to be harmful to the child in all or virtually all cases. On the other hand, adult-adolescent sex, like all sexual relationships, has serious risks, but I do not think it is intrinsically harmful to the adolescent partner. This is, of course, the argument that the Catholic hierarchy has been using, generally unsuccessfully, to mitigate its guilt in the "sex abuse" scandal.

Second, there is, of course, a biological basis for treating "statutory rape" of girls more severely than "statutory rape" of boys. Girls can get pregnant, and motherhood is a more significant physical, psychological, social, and economic burden than fatherhood. However, our society is committed to legal equality between the sexes and I don't think that this difference justifies making an exception to the principle of sexual equality when it comes to the age of consent.

Finally, school teachers,like other professions entrusted with important responsibilities, are a special case. Teachers are not hired for the purpose of having sex with their students, and school boards and parents can reasonably expect that teachers will keep their hands off the merchandise, whether the student is under or over the age of consent. This is, I think, a separate issue from the age of consent.

How bemused he would be if his 15 year old son were carrying on with his football coach?

A 30 year old female HS teacher with a male HS student is a "fantasy".

A 30 year old male HS teacher with a female HS student is a "statutory rapist".

A 30 year old male HS teacher with a male HS student is a "molester"

A 30 year old female HS teacher with a female HS student is probably on PPV somewhere right now.

I don't think this country is mature enough to consent to this debate yet. Keep the laws as they are. They may seem odd at times, but at least they're consistent.

8 years ago at the age of 16 I had a relationship with a teacher. Wow, after that my following girlfriends all seemed quite immature. She was a true master and I never learned so much so quickly. And the whole affaire being illegal made it that much more thrilling. Trying to avoid getting caught between classes was exhalerating. Making it legal or accepted would really have drained the fun out of it.

Frank

are you talking about. It may be that you don't want the relationship to happen, for reasons which "others" have clearly explained but it's absurd to say that we have to prohibit and punish relationships which aren't real. How would people react if 99% of the girls who had relationships that they regretted later were told "you don't know your own feelings we think it was good for you".

Mike, the difference between a 15 year old and a 22 year old having consensual sex with an older person is that legally and developmentally, the 22 year old has reached the age where we can presume that she can be responsible for herself. Sure, we all live and learn, and not many of us would make the same choices at 42 that we would make at 22. And while a 22 year old may not make the smartest choices in the world, they are her choices to make. While it is certainly possible for a 15 year old to have the same level of maturity as a 22 year old, the point is that for legal and social purposes, the presumption is that she doesn't. And given how much changes on a developmental level in those years, it's a pretty safe bet.

Oh, and if that 42 year old does use a position of power to unfairly coerce sex from a 22 year old, that's every bit as dispicable as when the 30 year old teacher does it to a 15 year old. It's also usually legally actionable, either as sexual harassment or rape, depending on how severe the circumstances.

And as for those who are taking the whole "but boys don't take sex seriously so how can a fling with an older woman possibly hurt them and this is their greatest fantasy so why not indulge them" attitude: get a clue. As the old saying goes, the boy is father to the man he becomes. A boy who is taken advantage of by an older woman learns that power is an appropriate tool to use to obtain sexual gratification. A boy whose first experiences with sex are devoid of emotional connection becomes a man who glides through life expecting more of those shallow, one-sided relationships. A boy whose first sexual encounters resemble juvenile fantasies comes to expect that future encounters will be equally juvenile-ly fantastic.

Sure, those moments in the back seat of a car or on your mother's couch fumbling with a girl's bra strap are frought with anxiety and emotional turmoil, but they are important milestones that teach a young boy that sex can be complicated and frustrating, because it's not just about gratifying his extremely demanding penis. It's an important lesson in how the world really works. That's the problem with having your first experience with anything resemble a boy's fantasy scenario -- the rest of his life is simply not going to live up to that experience, creating a lifetime of disappointment where in fact there should be joy and discovery.

Because the truth of the matter is that most of us don't live in a fantasy world -- we have real relationships with real people. And if you've got your head on straight, you realize that the nitty gritty of those real relationships are ultimately more satisfying than any cartoonish fantasy you have in your head. Making fantasies real is a great thing, don't get me wrong. But if you are incapable of recognizing that a fantasy is a tantalizing and welcome exception, not the rule, then you're not ready for fantasy play. And a 16 year old boy who has no other sexual experience is most definately not ready for fantasy sex play.