The Globe's Ellen Goodman writes about the state of Kansas' law that any sexual activity in children under the age of sixteen, even with another teenager, is sexual abuse. Of interest is this little tidbit:
There was also the testimony of Dr. Elizabeth Shadigian, best known as a stalwart of the abortion-gives-you-breast-cancer misinformation campaign. She said that teenage girls are always the victims of sexual activity because ''there's always a power differential between a boy and a girl." When girls have sex, they aren't doing, she said, ''they have been done to."
Wow.
I don't even know what to make of this. Is a courtroom the best place to argue about the motivations of sexual behaviors between teenagers? Because some girls I went to high school with were just as good at "doing to" a boy than any jock or Kid Who Plays In All the Bands. Are we so reactionary that we have to overcompensate so much, to hold up the super-conservative ideals and hope that kids fall somewhere between reproductive Fort Knox and Boston Public Library ("Free for All")? Is it possible to legislate a teenager's sexual behavior? Should it be possible to legislate anyone's sexual behavior? What is normal teenage sexual behavior? Does the same thing apply to adults? If we're doing it before our wedding days, does that mean we're sexually abusing a peer? I am asking a lot of questions because I have no solid answers to this.
Goodman also uses the phrase "sexually inert" which is something that belongs on a t-shirt. "No, I'm not seeing anyone right now. I'm sexually inert."
No comments:
Post a Comment