Statutory rape
The term "statutory rape" is sometimes used when national and/or regional governments, citing an interest in protecting minors, consider people under a certain age to be unable to give consent, and therefore consider sexual contact with them to be equivalent to rape regardless of the minor's consent.
The age at which individuals are considered competent to give consent is the age of consent (AOC). Age of consent is usually the age at which an individual can legally have intercourse with an adult, but in some jurisdictions the AOC establishes the minimum age of sexual conduct with anyone, regardless of age. In jurisdictions with the latter, it would be possible to charge two minor actors with a violation of the state's AOC.
Many jurisdictions have multiple age determiners for AOC, as well as a second "statutory rape age boundary." For instance, an adult engaging in sexual intercourse in a particular jurisdiction with an individual under the age of 12 may be charged with a full statutory rape charge (a charge fully equivalent in punishment and severity to rape) whereas intercourse with an individual between the ages of 13–16 may be a significantly lesser charge (such as "unlawful sexual conduct with a minor" or "criminal sexual conduct with a minor." Depending on the jurisdiction, the age difference between the participants, and other factors, criminal sanctions for violations of the age of consent which are not statutory rape may range from a minor misdemeanor to a high level felony. Some jurisdictions have a third age boundary which is an age of consent that is relevant in situations in which the adult actor is in a position of authority over the minor (e.g., the minor's teacher, doctor, coach, school principal, mental health provider, et cetera). The massive confusion caused by the various but very different sexual crime laws (which often have legal terms which are not interchangeable or parallel from jurisdiction to jurisdiction) usually leads people to assume that any violation of the age of consent is a "stautory rape" crime.
Laws vary widely in their definitions of statutory rape; some states make exceptions when the older person is also young or of a similar age, or if he or she marries the minor before the act of sexual intercourse or before being charged with the offense. Due to a wide variety of opinions on what the proper age of consent should be, and conflicts between child sex protection laws and the natural exploration of teenage sexuality, statutory rape charges can sometimes be controversial and contradictory.
Rationale of Statutory-rape laws
The rationale is typically that although a person may be biologically mature enough to desire sexual intercourse, he or she may, lacking the additional years of experience and social seasoning possessed by legal adults, not be able to make mature or rational decisions as to whom he or she has sex with. Thus, even if he or she willingly engages in sexual intercourse with an older person, said older person may well have used tactics of manipulation or deceit against which the younger person has not yet developed sufficient discernment or defense.
This is perhaps one of the major points of contention in statutory rape controversies; even a young teenager might possess enough social sense to make informed and mature decisions about sex, and, conversely, some people well above any agreed-upon age of consent might never develop the ability to make mature choices about sex, as even many mentally healthy individuals remain naive and easily manipulated throughout their lives. Any agreed-upon age of consent, however useful it may be for the perceived "average" individual, therefore necessarily carries with it some degree of arbitrariness.
Strange circumstances
The issue of statutory rape may be further complicated by minors who, for whatever reason (early development, use of clothing and makeup, et cetera) appear to be of consenting age, and/or lie about their age, in order to pursue sexual relationships with older persons. While it may seem reasonable enough to expect an adult to get to know someone enough to know his or her true age before engaging in sexual activities, the reality is that in a world where anonymous sexual encounters and other indiscretions are commonplace, someone above the age of consent might find himself or herself in violation of statutory rape laws without having knowingly engaged in sex with a minor. Often these cases boil down to the adult's word against the minor's, and which of the two a judge or jury chooses to believe. It is therefore inevitable that, in at least a handful of cases, adults have occasionally been "set up" by minors. To complicate the matter even more, the "adults" in such cases may be only a year or two above the age of consent, and local laws may or may not have provisions for cases in which the "adult" and "minor" are nearly the same age.
In the past, sex involving an adult female and an underage male were often ignored by the law, as many believed that this was not a bad experience for teenage boys. However, in recent years, the situation has changed, and there have now been a number of high profile cases (Mary Kay Letourneau, Debra Lafave, Tammy Imre, Kevin Burke, Pamela Rogers Turner) where adult women have been prosecuted for establishing sexual relationships with younger boys.
Statutory rape laws as social conditioning
As noted above, it is not wholly inconceivable that even a young teenager, if only an exceptionally mature one, be able to make mature and responsible decisions regarding sex. Parents who perceive their children as possessing sexual maturity at a young age generally expect that these children understand the consequences of sexual intercourse with an older person; namely the grave legal trouble said older persons face as a result of statutory rape laws. Children who feel they are mature enough to engage in sexual activities, especially with older persons, are therefore expected to prove their maturity by abstaining from such activities. In this way, statutory rape laws serve a dual purpose — protecting minors that lack the maturity to make wise choices regarding sex while at the same time encouraging minors to show greater maturity and responsibility by exercising restraint and control over their biological urges rather than letting their biological urges control their decisions. The intended result, at least in theory, is that this restraint and abstinence breeds children who have more sexual maturity by the time they reach the age of consent than they might otherwise have had.
Opposing views
This view is however by no means universal, as there are many people who feel that such sexual repression actually equates to sexual immaturity. Such individuals argue that sexual maturity is the result of the elimination of sexual inhibitions, and provide the strongest voices against the very concept of statutory rape. Obversely, those who regard sexual inhibitions as sexual immaturity and the lack of them as sexual maturity are often accused themselves of being sexually immature for not having developed proper restraint.
Predictably, these larger issues of sexual morality and debate between the sexually conservative and sexually liberal are inexorably linked to the issue of statutory rape, with the most conservative proclaiming that any sex at all outside of certain pre-determined situations such as marriage be treated as immoral and/or criminal, and the most liberal desiring that the mere enjoyment of physical stimulation on any sexual or emotional level be the sole criterion of consent. While most people would not support either of these extremes, vocal minorities on either side of the spectrum have led to stereotyping, pigeon-holing, and straw man fighting engaged in by those leaning nearer the other, causing the issue of statutory rape to grow even more emotionally charged over time. This has made discussion of the issue itself, like most issues dealing with questions of sexual morality and/or responsibility, something of a taboo.
Current Issues
While there is broad support for statutory rape laws in the United States, there is substantial debate on how vigorously such cases should be pursued and under what circumstances. In July, 2005, Matthew Koso of Falls City, Nebraska was charged with statutory rape for premarital sex with a 13-year-old whom he subsequently married. The decision to prosecute Koso--which was undertaken by the state's Attorney General, overruling the decision of the local prosecutor--has been controversial, with public opinion tilting in favor of Koso. See an example of a web page in opposition to the state's actions: Bruning's "Shotgun Divorce"