(Untitled)

[nineve]

As a fierce advocate for gay rights and equality, I have to say that I'm hugely disappointed that a decision that the law must treat homosexual acts the same as heterosexual acts comes in the context of statutory rape. Am I the only one who feels this way?http://

Comments

[charlicatmcgee]

I guess I'm not sure why you feel that way. Do you care to explain?

Personally, I think it's a great thing that the Kansas court struck down harsher penalties for same-sex statutory rape as based on discriminatory animus. The defendant in this case was serving a 17-year sentence for same-sex stautory rape--when his sentence would have been 15 months had he been convicted of heterosexual statutory rape. This disparty in the Kansas statute codified the rampant inequalities faced by the queer community, and I'm happy to see it struck down.

I think it's also great insofar as it's the first post-Lawrence lower court victory for queer rights. Let's hope it's one of many!

[nineve]

Well, I do think it is a great defense victory. However, I would rather, politically, that these victories come in a different context. I agree that a person shouldn't serve a longer sentence simply because the acts they engaged in were homosexual but the problem is that I don't want this type of person to be representative of a gay rights movement. I think politically people look at situations like these and see child-molestor more than they see that something is inherently unfair. And it is difficult to sympathize with an adult who had sex with a 14 year old. In terms of drawing attention to legal issues in the gay community I don't want the martyr to be someone who is despicable for other reasons- because it is easy for those reasons to be correlated with being gay and I see that as a potential social set back- regardless of what the court rules- especially with a lower court whose decision is easily overturned.

[charlicatmcgee]

I see your point, but this was an 18 year old kid engaging in sexual conduct with someone who was almost 15--I certainly wouldn't call that child molestation.

As for the potential association of homosexuality with child molestation, I think that all this case is asking is that the queer community be subject to the same laws as the hetero community--at base, if you're going to assume that we're all child molesters, treat us with the same penalites as the heterosexual child molesters.

On a macro level, I don't see this reinforcing negative stereotypes of homosexuals because of the fact that these kids were close in age. This certainly wouldn't be such a celebrated precedent if the plaintiff had been a 60 man engaging with a 13 year old boy, but that speaks to intergenerational issues rather than qualms about sexuality.

[aredoubt]

i'd have to agree....why the dissatisfaction? sounds like a good deal.