Principal of top school under investigation for hiring prost
-
WeiHan:
Many, especially men, like to use this argument it seems.
My point is simply that sex should not be a crime as long as both party is agreeable and both party is qualified to make decision. Not one party is mentally retarded or handicapped and is taken advantage of. As for the underage question, it is subjective, who knows that a 17yo can't be smarter than a 35yo man? The law should probably be revised to reflect reality?
Yes there are many 15 yr olds who are smart and many 35 year olds who are dumb. The point is the not that . 15 yr old who is immature emotinally will likely gain more maturity and be able to handle oneself by 18 than not. We give them the chance to do that.
Whe I was 15, I would say I was outspoken, smart, brave and mature. Yet, I was shocked that 35- 40 yr old men, total strangers, who can hit on me. To me they were father figures. But obviously to them I was a not. The lecherous look, the body language scared me /bewildered me. It took some time to understand and handle the @@#$$!@!!s ( forgive me , I need to put this here, which clearly shows I still dont understand that animal behaviour, but yes I know how to take care of myself). It was a time of emotional turmoil. And as I shared , I realised almost all of my girl friends experienced it too.
My experience is not unique. Far from it. With an open mind ask the women who are close to you, who can share with you . And you will hear this story. Again and again and again.
If at that point, I were to have been in trying circumstances financially or emotionally, then I could have been exploited. Even without me realising it.
And that is why I insist this rule must stay. Otherwise many women will be exploited. Yes it is a bit lopsided, but the damage is far greater if it were not. Just because one girl or a few girls used it, dont give leeway to men to exploit many other girls.
Why 18 ? why not 20 ? why not 16? why not 14? is a debatable point.
18 is the time you are considered mature to take independent decisions, a time you become a major. And this is definitely a major decision.
The bottom line is this- the onus is on the man to check this out. And that should stay. -
WeiHan:
The issue is how is the law going to determine whether the 17 yr old is smarter than than 35 yr old? The law will simply have to draw the line (however arbitrary it is) at a certain age and here it is 18 yrs which is the international norm.
My point is simply that sex should not be a crime as long as both party is agreeable and both party is qualified to make decision. Not one party is mentally retarded or handicapped and is taken advantage of. As for the underage question, it is subjective, who knows that a 17yo can't be smarter than a 35yo man? The law should probably be revised to reflect reality?
Similarly, setting the age of majority at 21 years or 18 years (in other countries) is also arbitrary since many teenagers below 18 or 21 are old enough to make their own decisions and bear legal consequences for their own decisions. But the law needs to draw the line somewhere.
The subjectivity comes in the prosecutorial discretion whether to prosecure a certain offence and in the sentencing options available to the judge. -
WeiHan:
It seems that you know many of these guys and they are so liberal to confess to you.[/quote]WeiHan,buds:
[quote=\"znzyzyzx\"]Eh..., if a crime is committed , then the culprit needs to be dealt with, no? What has it got to do with whether they had study hard, they are the pillar of the society.
Many of the guys who do like patronizing prostitutes claims almost the same thing.. \"We've worked very hard and deserve to reward ourselves...\"
Sick.
Need to stoop to personal attack? So despo? -
Gud points fr sun 2010 n Musings on d need for d law to protect d young n innocent fr sexual exploitation.
But a law must also seen to be fair, to act against those who exploit it (n men's weakness) for personal gain, yes?Musings:
No subjectivity here for underage prostitution - in much as I know, d law has been strictly applied to those who r caught.
The subjectivity comes in the prosecutorial discretion whether to prosecure a certain offence and in the sentencing options available to the judge. -
Way2GO:
If the girl falsified papers like IC to show she was 18 then yes.Gud points fr sun 2010 n Musings on d need for d law to protect d young n innocent fr sexual exploitation.
No subjectivity here for underage prostitution - in much as I know, d law has been strictly applied to those who r caught.
But a law must also seen to be fair, to act against those who exploit it (n men's weakness) for personal gain, yes?Musings:
The subjectivity comes in the prosecutorial discretion whether to prosecure a certain offence and in the sentencing options available to the judge.
If the man has not tried to check, then the fault is his.
are you saying the law should protect men who are too weak in will and hence succumb to the charms of an underage?
Or
Are you saying the men have been cheated here?
That they had no ilking she could be underage? -
no, no, not to protect d men who r weak -willed or succumb to a moment of folly.
But… if underage prost lied about their age or present false documents, shdn’t dat be a mitigating factor?
d men now bear d full brunt of d law - false advertising, lying notwithstanding. -
Way2GO:
I don't think this is accurate. The law is the law. But the prosecution (AG chambers or public prosecutor) will decide whether to prosecute after police has completed investigations - the offender will know whether the AGC has decided to prosecute when they are formally charged. Many factors go into prosecutorial discretion such as whether there is sufficient evidence, whether there is a public interest in prosecuting etc.Gud points fr sun 2010 n Musings on d need for d law to protect d young n innocent fr sexual exploitation.
No subjectivity here for underage prostitution - in much as I know, d law has been strictly applied to those who r caught.
But a law must also seen to be fair, to act against those who exploit it (n men's weakness) for personal gain, yes?Musings:
The subjectivity comes in the prosecutorial discretion whether to prosecure a certain offence and in the sentencing options available to the judge.
The truth is the state does not have infinite resources to go after every single offender.
My view is the law cannot introduce a subjective element of whether the offender has knowledge of the age of the underage prostitute - otherwise you will never be able to nail the offender because every single offender will claim they were 'misled', they didn't know. This is similar to the strict offence of harbouring an illegal immigrant - it is not a defence to say you did not know the tenant in your house is an illegal immigrant. The onus is on you to check. If you choose not to do your homework properly, then live with the risk.
The law serves a a deterrent to people who may be tempted to go for very young prostitutes (they may just be underage and you will never be able to fully verify it) which on balance I believe is necessary to protect the underage girls.
Yes, there will be cases when some of these girls are very sophisticated and exploit the men but to begin with, nobody ask the men to go for the very young things right? Nobody is banning the men from visiting prostitutes but do your homework lah! -
Way2GO:
I believe this will be a mitigating factor. And I am sure the well known lawyers hired by these defendants will make these arguments.no, no, not to protect d men who r weak -willed or succumb to a moment of folly.
But... if underage prost lied about their age or present false documents, shdn't dat be a mitigating factor?
d men now bear d full brunt of d law - false advertising, lying notwithstanding. -
Sun_2010:
Do I sound so serious? Just trying to be funny. fail.
WeiHan,
Need to stoop to personal attack? So despo?
I know when it comes to topic on sex, people can be in totally different frequencies. -
Musings:
The subjectivity comes in the prosecutorial discretion whether to prosecure a certain offence and in the sentencing options available to the judge.
I happen to believe that if there is too much leeway given to prosecutorial discretion, it may lead to abusing.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login
Online Users
Statistics
Popular Topics