As I sit down to write I find myself in a moral dilemma, my intention was to write on the subject of statutory rape and the consequences of those actions. My subject would have only consisted of men having sex with underage girls, due to the fact that underage boys having sexual relations with women of legal age is not nearly as common and in reality most usually does not carry with it the same consequences of economic strive or emotional distress. I was curious as to why we as a society have condoned this action by turning a blind eye to the practice of men impregnating underage girls, but as I sit and stare at the screen I have concluded that to write in the context that I had previously envisioned would make me nothing more than a hypocrite.
I fathered a child, my oldest daughter Delisha, at the ripe old age of seventeen, while her mother was still in school and fourteen. And even though we both were still considered being minors and therefore there was no criminal act committed, it was still a crime against our own well being. I have made many a mistake in my life time, but I do not consider either one of my children being one of those mistakes, and hope that they nor anyone else would ever take that out of context.
So to sit down and to write my congressman or my senator and voice my opinion of how the laws concerning statutory rape and penalties to which they carry should be stiffened in reality would not hold much water, simply for the reason that in reality what power does a politician actually have anyway. We could make every thing in the world illegal to do and all that it will accomplish is to generate more criminals. So instead I will speak to those whom hold real power, the participants themselves.
The reference point for the subject I was to write about was an instance of a young girl that I recently knew who bore a child from a much older man, and of course as fate would have it from my prospective the man was nothing more than a deadbeat. In committing this act he cheated his family, his wife, his current children and or course he cheated the victim herself by giving in to his weakness.
That’s what having sex with an underage girl is, a weakness. The reasoning that so many uses “she threw herself at me” or “she didn’t act like a minor” simply does not hold water, this is a test of manhood, and unfortunately a lot of oversized boys fail that test. When a man has sex with a minor it is not considered wrong for the reasoning of physical ability, in most cases a young girl who mothers a child is physically more capable of doing so than is a woman who attempts to do so later in life, it is wrong from the moral standpoint.
What a man has really done is stolen a childhood, and disabled a soon to be woman. He has taken a young girl who has not had the chance to come into her own and search out her own identity, and handed her an identity that may not only be one that she may not have wanted but my also be one she cannot accept. He has disabled her in the matter of speaking that from that point on every decision that she makes must be made considering both her and her child. She will have to learn to take care of two when she has not had the opportunity to learn how to take care of one. Her childhood has been stolen.
In the financial aspect of all to this he had put on her a responsibility that she does not have the means to support, so in turn he has put on another a responsibility that could have been avoided. The statistics are overwhelming that the incoming child will face economic disability from this situation, and itself will be hindered in his or her search for a brighter future. In most cases the child will immediately be placed on government assistance or in the care of another in order to assure that it will have a shot at a good future in this country.
This is where the measure of a man comes into play, what is the gauge by which we measure a man? Is it his looks? His mental ability? Hs financial ability? Or is it his sexual awareness? Should someone be considered a man simply by reaching the age of adulthood? Or from the point when he gets his first car?
The standard by what we consider a man is as diverse as the population itself, but one thing is certain the standard by which we consider someone not to be a man is with out a doubt un-bending, one who does not accept the responsibility of his own children cannot in any book be considered a man. An individual who can produce children but will not take responsibility of those children is not a man, but a boy with a toy he cannot control.
In any case an individual who cannot turn from the weakness of accepting the advancements of a young girl is indeed a simple willed person. He has failed a test, and ignored his good common sense.