On 2023-01-20 1:57 a.m., RichA wrote:
> Not really sure what this guy did wrong, aside from being someone trying to attract women online.

Girls. When they are 16 we still call them girls. As for the charges
against Tate and his brother, those are just unlawful confinement, and
sexual assault. Sexual assault both in the sense of having sexual
congress with minors, and forcing sex on adult women who didn't want it.
The Romanians are also charging with them their equivalent of a RICO
violation for coercing women into performing in online porn with him
getting 80% of the proceeds.

>Meanwhile, one of the women who said she was contacted is holding a bag in a picture that I believe says, "What doesn't kill you, disappoints me." WTF is that?
It's something a teenager trying to portray herself as tough and edgy
would wear.

David Johnston wrote:
> On 2023-01-20 1:57 a.m., RichA wrote:
>> Not really sure what this guy did wrong, aside from being someone trying to
>> attract women online.
>
> Girls. When they are 16 we still call them girls. As for the charges
> against Tate and his brother, those are just unlawful confinement, and sexual
> assault. Sexual assault both in the sense of having sexual congress with
> minors, and forcing sex on adult women who didn't want it. The Romanians
> are also charging with them their equivalent of a RICO violation for coercing
> women into performing in online porn with him getting 80% of the proceeds.
>
>
>>Meanwhile, one of the women who said she was contacted is holding a bag in a
>> picture that I believe says, "What doesn't kill you, disappoints me." WTF
>> is that?
> It's something a teenager trying to portray herself as tough and edgy would
> wear.

I myself had sex very often with a minor, when I was myself a minor. I
wonder if it was legal. :-?

In article <k30uqeFmjhuU1@mid.individual.net>, Capricorne
<capricorne@gmail.com> wrote:

> I myself had sex very often with a minor, when I was myself a minor. I
> wonder if it was legal. :-?

The short answer is no, it wasn't. You'd have been charged as a
juvenile, though. Your partner, if female, likely wouldn't have been
charged at all.

IRL these things are never pursued unless a parent goes gonzo nuts and
insists upon it.

A Friend <nope@noway.com> wrote:
> In article <k30uqeFmjhuU1@mid.individual.net>, Capricorne
> <capricorne@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I myself had sex very often with a minor, when I was myself a minor. I
>> wonder if it was legal. :-?
>
> The short answer is no, it wasn't. You'd have been charged as a
> juvenile, though. Your partner, if female, likely wouldn't have been
> charged at all.

Which would be an unconstitutional violation of the Equal Protection Clause
of the 14th Amendment.

In article <xPCdnbimPM9w_Fb-nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>, BTR1701
<no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> A Friend <nope@noway.com> wrote:
> > In article <k30uqeFmjhuU1@mid.individual.net>, Capricorne
> > <capricorne@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I myself had sex very often with a minor, when I was myself a minor. I
> >> wonder if it was legal. :-?
> >
> > The short answer is no, it wasn't. You'd have been charged as a
> > juvenile, though. Your partner, if female, likely wouldn't have been
> > charged at all.
>
> Which would be an unconstitutional violation of the Equal Protection Clause
> of the 14th Amendment.

So let's prosecute the girls, too, for something that shouldn't be a
crime at all. Terrific.

On 2023-01-20 6:52 p.m., Capricorne wrote:
> David Johnston wrote:
>> On 2023-01-20 1:57 a.m., RichA wrote:
>>> Not really sure what this guy did wrong, aside from being someone
>>> trying to attract women online.
>>
>> Girls.  When they are 16 we still call them girls.  As for the charges
>> against Tate and his brother, those are just unlawful confinement, and
>> sexual assault.  Sexual assault both in the sense of having sexual
>> congress with minors, and forcing sex on adult women who didn't want
>> it.   The Romanians are also charging with them their equivalent of a
>> RICO violation for coercing women into performing in online porn with
>> him getting 80% of the proceeds.
>>
>>
>>> Meanwhile, one of the women who said she was contacted is holding a
>>> bag in a picture that I believe says, "What doesn't kill you,
>>> disappoints me."  WTF is that?
>> It's something a teenager trying to portray herself as tough and edgy
>> would wear.
>
>
> I myself had sex very often with a minor, when I was myself a minor. I
> wonder if it was legal. :-?

Probably. They're called "Romeo and Juliet laws" set up to protect
horny teenagers from prosecution.

On 2023-01-20 8:06 p.m., A Friend wrote:
> In article <k30uqeFmjhuU1@mid.individual.net>, Capricorne
> <capricorne@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I myself had sex very often with a minor, when I was myself a minor. I
>> wonder if it was legal. :-?
>
>
> The short answer is no, it wasn't.

https://khmnlaw.com/2013/08/27/what-is-a-romeo-and-juliet-law/

On 1/20/23 9:33 PM, RichA wrote:
> On Friday, 20 January 2023 at 20:37:58 UTC-5, David Johnston wrote:
>> On 2023-01-20 1:57 a.m., RichA wrote:
>>> Not really sure what this guy did wrong, aside from being someone trying to attract women online.
>> Girls. When they are 16 we still call them girls. As for the charges
>> against Tate and his brother, those are just unlawful confinement, and
>> sexual assault. Sexual assault both in the sense of having sexual
>> congress with minors, and forcing sex on adult women who didn't want it.
>> The Romanians are also charging with them their equivalent of a RICO
>> violation for coercing women into performing in online porn with him
>> getting 80% of the proceeds.
>>> Meanwhile, one of the women who said she was contacted is holding a bag in a picture that I believe says, "What doesn't kill you, disappoints me." WTF is that?
>> It's something a teenager trying to portray herself as tough and edgy
>> would wear.
>
> If the guy had sex with a minor in a country that classed that person as a minor, that is a crime. But much of the talk of "trafficking" is awfully vague.

It isn't in Matt Gaetz's case. Just another right wing asshole of course.

On 1/20/23 9:54 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> A Friend <nope@noway.com> wrote:
>> In article <k30uqeFmjhuU1@mid.individual.net>, Capricorne
>> <capricorne@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I myself had sex very often with a minor, when I was myself a minor. I
>>> wonder if it was legal. :-?
>>
>> The short answer is no, it wasn't. You'd have been charged as a
>> juvenile, though. Your partner, if female, likely wouldn't have been
>> charged at all.
>
> Which would be an unconstitutional violation of the Equal Protection Clause
> of the 14th Amendment.

What about the Constitutional right to not give a shit?

In article <200120232318437798%nope@noway.com>,
A Friend <nope@noway.com> wrote:

> In article <xPCdnbimPM9w_Fb-nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>, BTR1701
> <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> > A Friend <nope@noway.com> wrote:
> > > In article <k30uqeFmjhuU1@mid.individual.net>, Capricorne
> > > <capricorne@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I myself had sex very often with a minor, when I was myself a minor. I
> > >> wonder if it was legal. :-?
> > >
> > > The short answer is no, it wasn't. You'd have been charged as a
> > > juvenile, though. Your partner, if female, likely wouldn't have been
> > > charged at all.
> >
> > Which would be an unconstitutional violation of the Equal Protection Clause
> > of the 14th Amendment.
>
> So let's prosecute the girls, too, for something that shouldn't be a
> crime at all. Terrific.

If you're going to ruin boys' lives over stupid shit, there's no reason
girls should get a pass. Takes two to tango.