Jump to content

Archived

This thread has been closed to further replies because it was not updated for 12 months. If you wish to have this thread reinstated, please contact an administrator.

Jae

Memphis pastor admits to sexual assault; receives standing ovation

Recommended Posts

On 1/10/2018 at 6:50 PM, Merryem said:

the context and response is disgusting but reading the girl's actual blog post, it's less of a "rape" and more of an abuse of power dead2 the girl was 17, the legal age of consent in Texas, and the guy was 22 at the time. according to the girl, he drove her to a secluded forest and then asked for a blowjob, which she gave to him consensually. afterwards he was worried that the church would find out that he "sinned" due to pre-marital sex and begged her not to tell anyone. not saying what he did was ok, but i wouldn't consider him a heinous criminal. more like abusing his position of power as a youth pastor over the girl, kind of like a college student having sex with a TA or Professor or something.

Abuse of power is sexual assault. She agreed to be driven home; not taken to a secluded wooded area and be asked to perform sex acts on her youth pastor. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Courtney Love said:

Abuse of power is sexual assault. She agreed to be driven home; not taken to a secluded wooded area and be asked to perform sex acts on her youth pastor. 

Abuse of power can lead to sexual assault, I agree. Do I think it's gross he didn't drive her home but instead to the woods? Yes. But again, she was of the age of consent and from a technical standpoint, this was a consensual sexual act between two individuals who were both of age. We have to stop acting like women are weak, powerless beings who are unable to act for themselves in any situation. She had every opportunity to express discomfort, say no, or anything else but (correct me if I'm wrong) she didn't. That isn't to say it's her fault, I'm not blaming her at all. But I do think we need to stop seeing these issues as it's either rape or it's not, sexual crimes range a wide gamut and this is more along the lines of sexual misconduct.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Merryem said:

Abuse of power can lead to sexual assault, I agree. Do I think it's gross he didn't drive her home but instead to the woods? Yes. But again, she was of the age of consent and from a technical standpoint, this was a consensual sexual act between two individuals who were both of age. We have to stop acting like women are weak, powerless beings who are unable to act for themselves in any situation. She had every opportunity to express discomfort, say no, or anything else but (correct me if I'm wrong) she didn't. That isn't to say it's her fault, I'm not blaming her at all. But I do think we need to stop seeing these issues as it's either rape or it's not, sexual crimes range a wide gamut and this is more along the lines of sexual misconduct.

Whether she was 12, 14 or 17 doesn't change the fact that this teenagers youth pastor propositioned her for oral sex... while in his car... under false pretenses... in secluded woods... at night... and alone. There is nothing in the way he carried it out that could be seen as anything but predatory. He knew exactly what he was doing and that he had the power.

As far as we know she never made any advances towards him previously so I'm not sure how his actions could be justified with an age of consent crutch considering his demand would have come seemingly at random. How often are you propositioned for sex by someone you know and trust, especially in a teenager/adult relationship? He held a position of authority over her as the youth pastor and literally lied to get her into his car. This was premeditated. 

And it's not a matter of assuming women are incapable of defending themselves so don't twist it; there would be plenty of men who are too scared to say no in fear of repercussions, not to mention the many women who would fight it. But just consider for a moment the position he put her in - alone in the woods with no one around to hear. I'd imagine you'd be coerced into whatever he says in fear of what else he might do if you didn't.  

I'm not accusing you of this specifically but I'd imagine if he were a 50yr old man at the time of the assault rather than 22 and only a few years older, the skeptics would be looking at it differently. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously? I can't with some of these so-called "Christians". And who are these people applauding him for his vile efforts? Please don't tell me they preach about peace, either. What a strange world we live in.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Courtney Love said:

Whether she was 12, 14 or 17 doesn't change the fact that this teenagers youth pastor propositioned her for oral sex... while in his car... under false pretenses... in secluded woods... at night... and alone. There is nothing in the way he carried it out that could be seen as anything but predatory. He knew exactly what he was doing and that he had the power.

As far as we know she never made any advances towards him previously so I'm not sure how his actions could be justified with an age of consent crutch considering his demand would have come seemingly at random. How often are you propositioned for sex by someone you know and trust, especially in a teenager/adult relationship? He held a position of authority over her as the youth pastor and literally lied to get her into his car. This was premeditated. 

And it's not a matter of assuming women are incapable of defending themselves so don't twist it; there would be plenty of men who are too scared to say no in fear of repercussions, not to mention the many women who would fight it. But just consider for a moment the position he put her in - alone in the woods with no one around to hear. I'd imagine you'd be coerced into whatever he says in fear of what else he might do if you didn't.  

I'm not accusing you of this specifically but I'd imagine if he were a 50yr old man at the time of the assault rather than 22 and only a few years older, the skeptics would be looking at it differently. 

 

Describing it in a negative light isn't really pertinent to what happened dead2 No one here is defending what happened. I'm not defending what happened. I even said it was vile what happened, it was an abuse of power, it was awful. Was it sexual assault? No. It doesn't matter if she didn't make any advances towards him previously, and age of consent is not a "crutch". It is a legal age where a person is able to consent to sex no matter how much older the person is than them. If someone of the age of consent wants to have sex with someone 5, 10, 50 years older than them, it's perfectly legal and within their jurisdiction to choose to do so. Were the circumstances under which the youth pastor asked for sex creepy? Absolutely. Is it nauseating that he was her pastor and used this position to ask her for sex? Yes. However, the key point is that he asked her. To define sexual assault even under coercion terms he would have to have threatened her, which it doesn't look like he did. He asked her for a blowjob and she obliged.   

Sexual assault is a serious crime that falls under unfortunately murky lines. However it's important to realize that not every crime or action that's sexual in nature is, in fact, sexual assault. She was 17, which is absolutely an age where a person can make rational decisions for themselves and she is legally able to consent to oral sex in that state. If she were in another state, it'd be a different question; but unfortunately those were the circumstances that she was in. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Merryem said:

Describing it in a negative light isn't really pertinent to what happened dead2 No one here is defending what happened. I'm not defending what happened. I even said it was vile what happened, it was an abuse of power, it was awful. Was it sexual assault? No. It doesn't matter if she didn't make any advances towards him previously, and age of consent is not a "crutch". It is a legal age where a person is able to consent to sex no matter how much older the person is than them. If someone of the age of consent wants to have sex with someone 5, 10, 50 years older than them, it's perfectly legal and within their jurisdiction to choose to do so. Were the circumstances under which the youth pastor asked for sex creepy? Absolutely. Is it nauseating that he was her pastor and used this position to ask her for sex? Yes. However, the key point is that he asked her. To define sexual assault even under coercion terms he would have to have threatened her, which it doesn't look like he did. He asked her for a blowjob and she obliged.   

Sexual assault is a serious crime that falls under unfortunately murky lines. However it's important to realize that not every crime or action that's sexual in nature is, in fact, sexual assault. She was 17, which is absolutely an age where a person can make rational decisions for themselves and she is legally able to consent to oral sex in that state. If she were in another state, it'd be a different question; but unfortunately those were the circumstances that she was in. 

 

 

Spoiler

Finished editing @Merryem

I described the setting without embellishments. It was negative no matter which way you spin it and I was pointing that out. I don't think you're getting my point either because I'm not confused about the age of consent law or saying you're supporting his actions.

Age of consent has been used as a crutch in this situation and you're effectively working as Devil's Advocate. You yourself acknowledged that sexual assault is a murky area and I agree that oftentimes things can be misinterpreted but he knew what he was doing when he offered her a ride home. His actions resulted in a deliberate attempt to get her alone in a confined space where he knew she was defenseless. Predators get away with this kind of abuse because their victim is of legal age and they have the law working on their side. They place them in these intimidating situations and (generally worried for their immediate safety) they will agree to whatever is happening. That isn't regret for bad sex - that is assault. These kind of crimes need to be assessed by situation because there are so many variables at play that you can't just make a decision based around one law.

Call it sexual assault or call it misconduct, I don't care. This man never faced any repercussions for what was clearly an abuse of his power.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Courtney Love said:
  Reveal hidden contents

Finished editing @Merryem

I described the setting without embellishments. It was negative no matter which way you spin it and I was pointing that out. I don't think you're getting my point either because I'm not confused about the age of consent law or saying you're supporting his actions.

Age of consent has been used as a crutch in this situation and you're effectively working as Devil's Advocate. You yourself acknowledged that sexual assault is a murky area and I agree that oftentimes things can be misinterpreted but he knew what he was doing when he offered her a ride home. His actions resulted in a deliberate attempt to get her alone in a confined space where he knew she was defenseless. Predators get away with this kind of abuse because their victim is of legal age and they have the law working on their side. They place them in these intimidating situations and (generally worried for their immediate safety) they will agree to whatever is happening. That isn't regret for bad sex - that is assault. These kind of crimes need to be assessed by situation because there are so many variables at play that you can't just make a decision based around one law.

Call it sexual assault or call it misconduct, I don't care. This man never faced any repercussions for what was clearly an abuse of his power.

5

You're right, but with the periods it just came off that way. I'm not trying to work as a Devil's Advocate. I agree that crimes should be assessed by situation, but it's important to not stretch laws beyond what they are. t's important to realize while the situation was intimidating, she wasn't threatened. Basing a decision off the fear of being threatened shouldn't be treated as a valid rationale behind sexual assault as that logic could set dangerous precedents and bend the meaning of what constitutes assault way too far. You're right, he should face repercussions for what he did but regardless it wasn't sexual assault, which I guess we agree on now. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 26
  • Created
  • Last Reply

  • Browsing now   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×