-- Posted by MiNNiCK at 9:24 am on Oct. 20, 2008 I just read this on a website: Sex with an underage person is rape. And I totally don't agree with that. If someone is 22 and someone is 16 or 17, that isn't rape at all...I'm reading that statement as a teenager, not anything else. -- Posted by rex reed at 9:25 am on Oct. 20, 2008 to the law, its rape...simple -- Posted by Dont Notice Me at 9:25 am on Oct. 20, 2008 rape no....illegal yes -- Posted by MiaBia at 9:26 am on Oct. 20, 2008 Then what should be the cut off age to have sex with people under 18? -- Posted by Vintorez at 9:26 am on Oct. 20, 2008 the law says its statutory rape. you don't have to agree with it -- Posted by nicegirl4060 at 9:26 am on Oct. 20, 2008 that is do true cuz when u 16 and 17 u already know whats right from wrong -- Posted by MiNNiCK at 9:26 am on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from dont notice me at 12:25 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 rape no....illegal yes Exactly. I think that the statement is worded wrong. -- Posted by Chiefette at 9:27 am on Oct. 20, 2008 They see it that someone underage many not know the full extent of what they are doing, or are probably being taken advantage of. It is one measure they are atleast attempting to make to stop pedos. I have no problem with it. It is called statutory rape, so technically it is rape.   -- Posted by newbie69 at 9:27 am on Oct. 20, 2008 If they are happy, it shouldnt even matter. Love is love. -- Posted by RIMHfire at 9:27 am on Oct. 20, 2008 Those pesky teenagers are just stupid. -- Posted by DefaultTo0 at 9:27 am on Oct. 20, 2008 That is not rape. Rape is defined as "Force (someone) to have sex against their will". Underage sex is defined as having sex with someone (or being the person) who is under the legal limit for sexual activity. -- Posted by MiNNiCK at 9:27 am on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from Vintorez at 12:26 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 the law says its statutory rape. you don't have to agree with it I understand what you're saying, just stating that "rape" isn't a word that should be used. -- Posted by Elite Taste at 9:27 am on Oct. 20, 2008 It's the thing about the age of consent. They say that people that are 16 don't know if they want sex or not I'd just say wait 2 more years and then fuck the **it out of them!! LOL jk -- Posted by SpM at 9:27 am on Oct. 20, 2008 Statutory rape, no? -- Posted by MiNNiCK at 9:28 am on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from DefaultTo0 at 12:27 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 That is not rape. Rape is defined as "Force (someone) to have sex against their will". Underage sex is defined as having sex with someone (or being the person) who is under the legal limit for sexual activity. Which is why I wonder why the site was wording it as such. Hmm -- Posted by kasami5 at 9:28 am on Oct. 20, 2008 that is the truth -- Posted by MiNNiCK at 9:28 am on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from Glory at 12:27 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 They see it that someone underage many not know the full extent of what they are doing, or are probably being taken advantage of.  It is one measure they are atleast attempting to make to stop pedos.  I have no problem with it. It is called statutory rape, so technically it is rape.   I'm not speaking on a pedo basis. I'm speaking about a teenage perspective. -- Posted by marshmellowman at 9:30 am on Oct. 20, 2008 It's statutory rape, only because a minor cannot legally consent to sex, therefore there is an absence of consent. Legally the absence of consent is what determines rape, so technically it is, even if really it was consensual sex. -- Posted by DirtyConspiracy at 9:30 am on Oct. 20, 2008 Isn't sex with someone under 13 classed as rape, because they're "too young" to give consent? -- Posted by MiNNiCK at 9:33 am on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from DirtyConspiracy at 12:30 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 Isn't sex with someone under 13 classed as rape, because they're "too young" to give consent? If you'd read my post, I wasn't speaking about under 13. -- Posted by MiNNiCK at 9:34 am on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from marshmellowman at 12:30 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 It's statutory rape, only because a minor cannot legally consent to sex, therefore there is an absence of consent. Legally the absence of consent is what determines rape, so technically it is, even if really it was consensual sex. That makes sense. I guess I wasn't reading it that way. I'm a bit of a mess mentally right now. But now I understand what it means. Lol. -- Posted by phoebe19 at 9:34 am on Oct. 20, 2008 rape  2 me is when some 1 says no n the other 1 dose it anyway  thats rape if 1  is 22 n the other is 17 n she n he want 2 do it its not rape -- Posted by DirtyConspiracy at 10:03 am on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from Minnick at 5:33 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from DirtyConspiracy at 12:30 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 Isn't sex with someone under 13 classed as rape, because they're "too young" to give consent? If you'd read my post, I wasn't speaking about under 13. Yeah, you were talking about people underage. People under 13 = underage. And since when has 16 and 17 been underage? -- Posted by MiNNiCK at 10:12 am on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from DirtyConspiracy at 1:03 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from Minnick at 5:33 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from DirtyConspiracy at 12:30 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 Isn't sex with someone under 13 classed as rape, because they're "too young" to give consent?    If you'd read my post, I wasn't speaking about under 13. Yeah, you were talking about people underage. People under 13 = underage. And since when has 16 and 17 been underage? If a 22 year old were fucking a 16 year old, that 16 year old is considered underage. So you still aren't getting my point.