No, it’s just another lazy excuse of male weakness, writes Hugo Schwyzer.
Please note that this column may prove triggering for some.
Can a little girl really seduce a grown man?
I was asked that question this week by a friend of mine, a graduate student whose dissertation looks at evolving attitudes towards sexual abuse. In the course of her research, my friend met a woman in her 40s who, over a series of interviews, repeatedly insisted that she’d been a “little Lolita” in her own preteen years. Deborah (not her real name, of course) wanted to make it clear that, as she put it, “grade-school girls can have sexual agendas too.”
Deborah, now a mother of teens herself, told my friend that when she was 11, she’d started taking private piano lessons. Her teacher was a married man in his 30s, and he gave these lessons out of his home while his wife was away. Deborah was desperate for affection, and she thought her piano teacher was “very handsome.” She cuddled up to him on the piano bench, and eventually worked her way up to sitting in his lap.
One day, she felt his erection driving against her. Deborah had secretly read her mother’s copy of The Joy of Sex; she knew—or thought she knew—what an erect penis meant. As she put it to my friend, she “delighted in knowing he was turned on,” and began to move around on his lap. Her teacher moaned and clasped her tighter; Deborah reported that it “felt really good.” When it was over, he sent her home angrily. But he didn’t cancel their next lesson, and soon she was in his lap again. Their sexual relationship only ended when Deborah and her family moved away.
In Deborah’s telling of the story, she was the pursuer and her teacher the pursued. That she was a preteen and he in his 30s was irrelevant. As she insisted to my friend, “sometimes girls are stronger than grown men.” Deborah seemed to remember the relationship with a mixture of pride and shame, noting that her teacher seemed powerless to resist her. “He always told me it would never happen again. But it always did.”
I’ve told my friend to refer Deborah to therapy. But I wanted to write about this story because it fits in well with one of the most troubling aspects of the myth of male weakness: the idea that adult men might be powerless to resist the charms of a seductive teen (or even pre-teen) girl. Deborah isn’t the only person who believes that girls might be responsible for seducing adult men. Listen to the chorus of complaints about how provocatively teens and tweens are dressed, and you’ll hear at least a few notes of concern that adolescents might be sending the “wrong message” to adult men. Call it the “Lolita Myth”: the idea that pubescent girls have the power to cause men many times their age to lose all sense of right and wrong.
♦◊♦
We see this theme in pornography. One of the staples of written erotica (both in serious literature and in modern porn) is that of the very young girl who seduces a much older man. A little Googling led to one website, “The Young Girl Erotic Repository.” It features an archive of stories, most of which feature the same thing: girls 12-16 (or even younger) seducing their uncles, teachers, pastors, and—astonishingly often—their own fathers. These little “nymphets” are invariably the aggressors, hungry for experience. The older men they pursue usually try to resist, pleading morality or common sense, but inevitably fall prey to the intensity of their own desire for these girls. It’s not hard to see that these stories are carefully crafted to alleviate the guilt of child molesters. But the mindset they reflect is one held by many who aren’t pedophiles.
I’ve heard stories like Deborah’s more than once. Most of the therapists I’ve talked to about this story have heard them as well. So I’m quite confident that some young girls (but far fewer than are imagined by a certain kind of pornographer) do try to seduce older men. Many children are hungry for attention, and many girls, sadly, have learned that the best way to get that attention is through their sexuality. And as psychologists have been telling us for generations, pre-pubescent children are capable of sexual feelings. In some instances, such as Deborah’s, a sexual encounter with an adult might genuinely “feel really good.” As I’ve written before, we make a huge mistake by assuming that the victims of sexual abuse never feel pleasure.
Rightly concerned as we are about the sexualization of young children, we need to be careful to remember that teens and tweens are sexual. Children and adolescents need the space and the freedom with which to develop their own healthy sexualities, free from the unhelpful encouragement to “be sexy” for others and from the equally toxic pressure to repress all of their desires until marriage. And one key way we help young girls develop a healthy sexuality that is theirs alone is by creating a culture in which they don’t see themselves as objects of adult male desire. That means the onus is solely on adult men to set and maintain good boundaries.
♦◊♦
Some teens do want, or think they want, sexual attention from older men. But the reality that underage girls (be they 11 or 17) occasionally behave seductively towards older men doesn’t mean that older men can “be seduced.” The word “seduce” means “to be led away” or “to be led astray.” No adult is so weak that he (or she) is powerless to refuse sexual temptation, much less from a child. As powerful as the libido is, it is not so strong as to trump the will. Testosterone may drive desire, but unless a man has sustained significant trauma to the moral center of his brain, hormones can’t override the power to choose. (Hint: an erection doesn’t constitute significant trauma to the right temporo-parietal junction.)
Deborah’s piano teacher had a choice as every man has a choice. The fact that she was blatantly seductive doesn’t in any way mitigate his responsibility to have chosen differently, just as the fact that she may have experienced both power and pleasure from what took place change the reality that she was sexually abused. There is no ambiguity when it comes to sex between adults and minors. An adult always has both the ability and the obligation to resist a seductive child. A child may grow up, as Deborah did, with an enduring sense of responsibility for a sexual relationship with an adult. But what Deborah needs to hear is that no matter how sexually aggressive she may have been, she was not in any way the architect of what happened.
There is no gray area here. Grown men who outsource their self-control to grown women underestimate their own capacity for reflection and restraint. Grown men who outsource that control to little girls—even little girls with women’s bodies—use the myth of male weakness to justify the unspeakable.
—Photo MaltaGirl/Flickr
About Hugo Schwyzer
When I was 14, I dated a 20-year old. He was known for dating girls in my high school choir… I was just one in a line of younger girls that he dated/hooked up with in the time that I knew him. I distinctly remember having a sense of power (however misguided) while things were happening, feeling like I was some sort of sexy thing, knowing that an older guy wanted me.
I never looked at it the way you’ve described, even knowing full well –now– that I have every right to blame him for taking advantage of me. I guess it’s not too big a jump from blaming him for the situation to removing that blame from my 14-year old self… but I’ve been carrying that guilt around for 9 years now, and this post definitely made me take another (less than pleasant, admittedly) look at that situation (and others). You’re right, though. An older man can be TEMPTED by a younger woman, but it’s his damn fault for CHOOSING to act inappropriately with a younger woman. I think the Lolita myth really just perpetuates victim-blaming and the guilt that victims wrongly carry around.
Does that make sense? I’m still wrapping my head around it all.
It does make sense, Lindsay, thank you. And removing that blame from your 14 year-old self is not dodging responsibility; it’s acknowledging that whatever the complexity of your motives, the reality is that he was the one who blew it, not you. No matter how flirtatious or seductive you may have been, this wasn’t 50/50. 20/14: 100/0 on the responsibility quotient.
I agree with your basic point, but you are arguing too hard for it. You seem to conflate seduction and sexual responsibility.
You’re certainly right that adult men have the responsibility to behave appropriately toward minors, and to control their own sexual behavior to ensure that they do. You’re right, too, that they should be expected to be able to do so, and that the myth of being “overcome” by the sexual advances of another – especially a minor – is false and pernicious.
But as you acknowledge, teenagers can and do behave seductively – and often knowingly. That certainly has an effect on the adults they entice, even if that effect is not explanatory or exculpatory of those adults’ behavior choices. It’s simply false to say that “no matter how sexually aggressive [a teenage girl] may have been, she was not in any way the architect of what happened”. It may be true that she was not morally responsible for what happened – young teens are not held to moral accountability for their behavior, especially in respect of their treatment by adults. But to say that they cannot *influence or initiate* such events through their willful behavior is to turn the seduction myth on its head – to assert that their behavior has *no* effect on the adult – which is just as false as the myth of the irresistible Lolita.
Better to say that some minors do attempt to seduce adults, or at least may act in flirtatious and provocative ways, perhaps without even knowing the implications of their behavior, and that that behavior may elicit a response from a susceptible adult, and that while the moral responsibility for responding appropriately lies unilaterally with the adult, the interaction between them is in one degree or another mutual. That seems more accurate, and thus a better stance from which to understand and try to set boundaries on adult/child relationships. Pretending that the child has no agency at all is simply wrong, and likely to lead to unrealistic policy.
What exactly would be the grand undesirable change in policy, even if we were to totally gloss over child sexual curiosity and acted as if they were all as patently disinterested in sex as the average infant? Such cases brought before the law are already predicated on the idea that children below a certain age are not to be used as sexual fodder for adults; and we also currently have a gaggle of defense attorneys and members of the general public who are ready to rip a child’s sexual purity apart, looking for flaws as a way to absolve the adults who abuse them. I daresay that it’s high time TO conflate the idea of the inability to seduce WITH the ultimate sexual responsibility of the adult — no, a little girl CANNOT seduce you.
S/he can be curious, sure. S/he can act out, in a manner most likely inappropriately learned elsewhere. S/he can have several different motives as to why s/he would express sexuality TO an adult. But as I see it, only other adults can actually commit the knowing act of “seduction” because only an adult has the equal POWER to do the leading astray. A minor has no such power; whether by blood, or by law, or by the principle of in loco parentis, adults are authority figures with greater legally observed power and influence. In a culture where children are taught to obey, to “respect their elders”, or at least that adults are the arbiters of what they can do/where they can go, this imbalance of power is especially clear.
The honest truth is, it does not MATTER what they do. A 14 year-old girl, hypothetically, should have the ability to jump around, stark naked, BEGGING for a sexual encounter, and an adult should have the unflinching, no-excuses-heard responsibility to resist those entreaties and maybe even direct her towards some sort of intervention to discover what would cause such an obviously indiscrete display. All those gray areas on the spectrum between complete and total purity, and Girls Gone Wild style sexual extraversion, should not be met with ANY excuses as to why the adult simply “couldn’t help him/herself”. If there’s ever going to be any honest justice in cases of real abuse — if the adult’s absolute responsibility is ever going to be realized — then the actions of the child should become of almost nil consequence.
“What exactly would be the grand undesirable change in policy, even if we were to totally gloss over child sexual curiosity and acted as if they were all as patently disinterested in sex as the average infant? . . . I daresay that it’s high time TO conflate the idea of the inability to seduce WITH the ultimate sexual responsibility of the adult — no, a little girl CANNOT seduce you.”
If we declare as a matter of fact (in defiance of fact) that girls are not and cannot be seductive, then we have to distort our messages to and about both the girls and the men.
First, if it is literally true that girls “cannot” be seductive, then it makes no sense telling girls not to act seductively. That is, there is nothing wrong with flirtation, display, or even begging, because those are not seductive acts. And if girls have no agency in their own sexuality, then there is no explanation for why men act toward them the way that they do – men apparently just either randomly or through uncontrollable pathology have sexual impulses toward girls, *for no reason actually related to the girls themselves*. And so of course there’s nothing the girls can do to reduce that response from men and no reason why they should try.
Second, if it is literally true that girls are not seductive, or willing participants in their own sexuality, then every sexual act between minor females and adult males is not just statutory (i.e., by definition of law) rape, but forcible rape – since teens never initiate, and apparently cannot want, sexual relations. This not only conflates those two categories of crime, but makes all girls who engaged in underage sex the victims of a violent crime. Both these characterizations are wrong, and they will lead not only to unjust punishments for the men, but inappropriate treatment or counseling for the girls. (You don’t tell victims of forcible rape “don’t seduce men anymore”; that is what you tell sexually precocious girls.) Pointing this out is not blaming the victim or a plea for sympathy for the offenders; it’s an observation of fact about how we make moral and psychological distinctions, coupled with the suggestion that it actually makes sense to make those distinctions. If that’s true, then mischaracterizing the events that call those distinctions into question is a bad idea.
Third, this whole myth of teen asexuality is a pervasive and reactionary erasure of the reality of girls’ lives – one that is ultimately pathological for them in many ways. Pretending that girls can’t be seductive comes from the same mindset as “purity rings” and “abstinence only” – the idea that if we don’t acknowledge a certain aspect of young people’s lives, there will never be any problems associated with that aspect. That’s not just creepy and anti-sex; it’s proven false. Worse, it puts young people in an impossible position: they are required to be totally asexual all their lives up to a specific point, and then – when they turn 18, when they get married, or whatever – to fully embrace an approved version of a sexuality that literally (supposedly) didn’t exist the day before. It doesn’t work that way, but the asexuality myth defines young people who do have sexual desires – and even worse, who act on them – as abnormal. It requires them to feel guilty about actually being sexual creatures; that’s perverse, and it also sets them up for abuse by making them feel they are at fault for anything they do.
Saying that adults are solely responsible for their behavior with or toward minors, and have an absolute responsibility to avoid sexual relations with them, is a moral claim that is not in conflict with the factual observation that young people are in fact sexual, and may sometimes behave in seductive or provocative ways. It does not bolster that moral claim to distort the facts in which it arises, and doing so may further distort our response to transgressions, our messages to girls about their own behavior, and the way we raise girls (and boys) to understand and take responsibility for their sexual natures.
The problem with your argument is that you’re still conflating “seductive” with “sexually curious” — having little knowledge of the sexual lay of the land would mean that a figurative blind man is leading around another person with relatively clear sight, and that’s bogus. The child does not “lead” an adult anywhere. Just because a 6 year-old plays dress up in her mom’s high heels and clothes and perfume does not mean she’s anywhere near ready to “be a woman”; she’s experimenting and, largely, imitating. Children imitate what they see daily; it stands to reason that they’ll imitate sexualized images, as well. And there are people who believe that, because the child has hit puberty and has breasts and now LOOKS a little more like a woman that any expression of sexuality — even one that IMITATES seduction — in fact, IS seduction. And it’s not. When the adult has more knowledge AND power, you are not being seduced. You are watching an experiment, or a dramatization of how that child believes relationships are played out, or even the attempt to use a currency that he or she has sadly been taught to believe works (“Maybe I can pass this class if I ‘do him a favor’”).
I’m not saying that children in such a position are ignorant of sexuality. It’s obvious that they’re not. But it’s like claiming an exotic dancer is trying to “seduce you” because she’s dancing in a sexy fashion in front of you. It’s quite obvious that the transaction isn’t meant as a standard, healthy expression of sexual interest — he or she wants something else (money), as per the understood dynamic of what happens when one walks into an exotic club. To pretend that every dancer who comes onto you in such a setting is somehow immediately sexually turned on JUST by your charms would be deluded at BEST. It’s not about YOUR prowess or sexual dynamism, it’s about their desire for your money in that environment.
When it involves a child, the act is more about him or her — whether it’s his or her curiosity, his or her feeling of exerting power (when he or she might otherwise feel powerless around adults — not uncommon in other settings of abuse they might have been exposed to previously), it’s not a mutual exchange of consent. It’s not about the adult — the adult just happens to profit from whatever is going on in the child’s head.
And I happen to think that taking advantage of that imbalance DOES constitute violence. You seem to think we should be interested in drawing a thicker line between statutory rape and supposedly more violent forms; I don’t think that’s true. An adult who would take advantage of sexual curiosity or acting out in a minor is no better to me, ethically, than a man who forces himself on another child or adult. The penalties for all should sit at the more stringent end of that spectrum, because I think if one is going to assert the idea that he had no control when he knows children are off-limits, then I’m not convinced he or she isn’t dangerous.
Alex, you are absolutely right! I cant imagine why an adult male would even want to argue this point unless he just wanted to find a loop hole to excuse himself to give in to abused or curious or love starved young girls or teenagers. Young girls want to fit in with their freinds. If all these poor kids see is pathetic slutty looking skirts only 4 inches long in fricking shopping mall windows, as they are walking along with their friends in junior high trying to learn about growing up and becoming a woman, and see Victoria blasting her damn secret on 15 foot by 15 foot walls in her face and see girls who look confident and popular and successful on tv sitcomes wearing the same pathetic degrading all you are is an object to men 4 inch skirts, and then when they stop at 7-11 for a soda and they are blasted with airbrushed images of woman told to stand with thier mouths open and legs spread apart to sell the magazines, what does this message communicate to an up and coming young 9 year old or 12 year old girl?!?!?!?!? I mean seriously!!! At my high school when I was that age, girls were made fun of by the other girls if they didnt have clothes that reflected the latest fashion and being picked on as school is soo painful for kids.
Seriously, HOW CAN WE EXPECT young girls to not pressure themselves agians thier own consceinces even, to act sexy, telling themselves that “well this must be what I am supposed to do to have my voice as a female be heard to matter as a female and to be treasured by someone.”
The fault is absoultely on the adult who gives in to these poor kids who have no chance unless they have someone to shield them and train them differently from this sick, everybody screw whats right and just please your own depraved hormones type of culture that our culture is becoming more and more every day. We must fight for moral change in this culture. Only a greater sea of pain in our fellow humans will ensue if we do not stand up for moral character in all. The out of control human trafficking problem which is greatest in the Us and developed countries says it all. These girls are drugged and threatened but that is a different story. We need the men and women of the world to let the media and fashion industries know that we can enjoy movies and clothes just as much even if they dont exploit girls and women.
FANTASTIC essay! Thank you so much for addressing this topic. One of the reasons it’s hard for me to watch modern pornography is that the women shave their pubic hair to make them look prepubescent. I find it disturbing that this image, the one of a young girl, is what some men are getting erections to! Men absolutely have a responsibility to act like adults and put an end to any kind of sexual flirtations they may receive from a child. Tweens and young teens don’t really know what they’re doing when they play around with sexual flirtations and something might get taken too far resulting in a traumatized child and an accusation of rape against the adult male.
I find it disturbing that you seem to think the only reason a man (or a woman!) would be attracted to somebody with shaved genitalia is because of the resemblance to a child’s genitalia. Would you say the same thing about models with very small breasts?
Hugh, would be interesting to know if Christina shaves her arms, legs, armpit hair etc
I would not be surprised if she did.
I have heard several smooth legged and underarmed ladies vocalize the same point that Christina made. One was a psychologist at that, … and not a French one.
No. What I think Christina is arguing is that the completely shaved body part there is an act done to alter herself. A lady with small breasts is not the same thing because she was born that way. It is still natural to have small breasts. Having that would of course not make her a girl any more than men having a small part would make them a boy. I must say, that I truly cant imagine too many women who would want their man to purposly make himself completely bald down there. I think most ladies would agree that thier man would remind them of a giant boy if he were to do so. You are correct in your thinking Christina. Culture is trying to steer women toward thinking that they need to resemble the pre pubescent look to remain attractive. While “weedwacking” (yes this detail is uncomfortable for me to discuss but nevertheless necessary) would be valuable among both genders, and women on underarms and legs as well, the culture definately is trying to pressure women into looking more like young girls with that trend. No doubt about it.
Yes, there is serious doubt about it. We can admit that maybe there are some men who like the bald look because it reminds them of prepubescence, but I was surprised when I heard that the first time. Most men who like the bald look like it for practical reasons: no hair to get in the way. This makes oral pleasure, penetration, and looking easier. Men are visual creatures and its annoying when the view of the holy portal is obscured by hair. This is more prevalent in porn because the camera view doesn’t want to be blocked by hair either.
Actually armpit hair & leg hair on a woman don’t bother me as much as having to spit out the other kind of hair.
Back in the day, men where happy to spit out “other kind of hair”. And the visualness of seeing a woman’s privates, even with hair, was still a turn on. Infact, was one sign that she was sexually mature.
While I don’t think shaved bits is always a desire for children, shaved bits has been something that was promoted through porn and normalized to the extent that men started asking their partners to shave themselves or women started doing it because it was what men liked. So I don’t really agree that shaved bits is purely because of “visualness”. It was something that became popular because porn sold it.
Jesus, seriously you want to assume males liking shaved female bodies in certain areas = they desire underage females? What kind of sick and warped mind do you have? I could argue that women are pedophiles because many want their men to have clean shaven faces, a clear sign of BOYHOOD in your logic.
SOME men like shaved/trimmed because they absolutely LOVE the look, the aesthetics of the vulva, they want to pleasure it orally without the hair getting in the way, they simply like to see smooth skin which is so often associated with feminine beauty. The fact hairless is the norm from birth is meaningless, we as a society trim, shave, wax our body hair in accordance with personal style + popular trends. Young children also have a penis, testicles, or vulva. Zomg men like humans with a vulva, they must be pedophiles because the vulva is also on children. This sick twisted logic is only helping to add to a social stain that is making women overly cautious of men, to the point where normal adult male and child relationships (NOT SEXUAL BTW) are suffering because of a hyper-pedohysteria.
This constant demonization of male sexuality and constant referral to pedophilic activities is quite misandrist and disgusting, you’re trying to create monsters out of innocent and DECENT men who simply like smooth skin on ADULT women. What SOME men and women do in regards to child abuse, chasing underage people etc doesn’t mean ALL of that gender/s do the same.
Seriously, how about a topic on HEALTHY sex to balance out the constant demonization of male sexuality. A topic where personal grooming styles is not a psuedo-link to pedophilia?
Shaving/waxing the genitals doesn’t lead to smooth skin, it leads to razor bumps, ingrown hairs, prickles and constant itching. Believe me, I’ve tried it, and that was the result. A few hours of smooth skin followed by days of misery, then you start the process over. I’ve known women who got pretty nasty infections from ingrown hairs. There are a lot of bacteria in that area and constantly broken and irritated skin in the genital area is not healthy. Personally I am not going to torture myself in that way to meet a man’s aesthetic standards, but that’s just me! However, I do wonder why men have so little empathy for the discomfort this fashion trend causes the owners of those lovely genitals.
@Jill: “However, I do wonder why men have so little empathy for the discomfort…”
Personally, I prefer the female genitals being “trimmed”; not hairy (for the already stated reasons), not shaved (because I know it becomes itchy and quickly prickly – hey, it rhymes!
).
Shaving can be a fun thing to try once in a blue moon… (waxing? Hughhh, that’s torture!).
Trimmed hair, OTOH, are easy, practical and don’t get in the way.
“And one key way we help young girls develop a healthy sexuality that is theirs alone is by creating a culture in which they don’t see themselves as objects of adult male desire. ”
Creating a culture of lies, then?
Pre-teen girls are not *appropriate* targets of adult male sexual *behaviour*, but they are targets of male sexual desire, and I see no evidence to suggest that this is about to change.
Children need truth, not comforting, unsafe lies.
Perhaps one of the ways to change that is to change the narrative of children’s responsibility/complicity in their own abuse. If we more readily accepted that there is literally NO excuse for adults taking advantage of underdeveloped child sexuality, perhaps the shift in attitude would accompany less of an emphasis on “young” and “hot”, and more of an emphasis on what is less harmful for all parties involved (i.e., consensual sex).
Call it an attempt to modify behavior, rather than accepting that men (or women, in some cases) are somehow slaves to it.
Sorry Alex…
Not likely to happen since the owness of adult behavior needs to falls squarely on the adult as will the consequences.
Personally I prefer education through aversion therapy. For example- “If you want to be a child’s bitch, then you’ll make an even better prison bitch”
It works on young girls who dress provocative too. America has this collective ownership of the chastity of young girls even when the proprietors of that virtue are willingly giving it away or using it to get rides around high school campuses from college aged men.
I think it is fair to say that some really young girls (under age 12 or 13) become “sexualized” due to a combination of factors. One factor is the earlier onset of puberty. At this age, a girl becomes fascinated by her own development and changes in her body. In addition , her hormone levels are rising, which brings about the occasion to stimulate themselves–obviously for pleasure. But another factor contributes to what could be described as inappropiate behaviors on the part of themselves. And this factor can easily be identified as their home life. It is fairly well known that kids who grow up in one-parent households, in which the other parent is not present, are more vulnerable to social problems than those kids who are raised in two-parent households in reasonably stable home environments. I believe that a girl raised without a father figure is much more prone to seek attention from an older male than girls who have a father in their lives. Their attention-seeking behavior manifest itself sexually because physical affection can be expressed either sexually or non-sexually. The “seduction factor” may be only a semi-conscious behavior on the part of the girl expressing it. One part of her wants “daddy” while the other part of her utilizes provocative behavior to seek attention (and affection) from an older male. Unfortunatley, many guys are looking for just that—a “lolita” to experience sex with. It’s a bad combination. Because unsuspecting girls who may be prone to such behaviors cannot always distinguish a guy who may act passivley toward them, as opposed to a guy who is looking for the perfect oppurtunity, adult figures in a young girl’s life need to educate and instruct them about what kind of behaviors can lead to trouble..
“Pre-teen girls are not *appropriate* targets of adult male sexual *behaviour*, but they are targets of male sexual desire, and I see no evidence to suggest that this is about to change.”
I see evidence that this is about to change. This website (and others like it) gives me hope (well, it sometimes does) that consciousness is evolving, and that people are starting to see each other (adults and minors) as people, and not simply attractive objects used to fuel all those wonderful lusty feelings. Lusty feelings are wonderful, but there really is more to life.
WHAT?!?
No, we dont create a culture of lies, We should care enough about people and our societies future and the welfare of young girls Adrian to where we each do what we can to change the sick culture that now exists. We dont just keep hurting and exploiting people or allowing it to contine by paying money to industries that degrade and objectify girls and women. We dont allow these confused kids to seduce us as adults. We can each do our part or morally, or we wil end up losing a part of our own consciences by burying our heads in the sand. We need to be just as protective of little boys as well.
>“And one key way we help young girls develop a healthy sexuality that is theirs alone is by creating a >culture in which they don’t see themselves as objects of adult male desire. ”
>
>Creating a culture of lies, then?
>
>Pre-teen girls are not *appropriate* targets of adult male sexual *behaviour*, but they are targets of >male sexual desire, and I see no evidence to suggest that this is about to change.
>
>Children need truth, not comforting, unsafe lies.
No, you missed the point completely. We need to teach girls to see themselves as SUBJECTS, not OBJECTS of sexual desire. This toxic culture teaches girls to see themselves solely through others’ desire of them, neglecting their own desires. To be sexy but not sexual.
Children need to taught sexual agency, not that their sexuality exists only for the consumption of others.
Katy, you really hit the nail on the head with that point and articulated it so gracefully. I know in my own experience that when I was younger, I approached sex from exactly the way you described. As being the object and not the subject. I did things to please my partner and didn’t think much about how much it pleased me. I think a lot of young girls and women find themselves in that trap. Our culture doesn’t celebrate female sexuality. It celebrates females conforming to an idea of female sexuality that really is more about what pleases men then what pleases women. That is more about, as you said, making women the objects in sexuality but not really the subject.
Yes, they can be seduced but it’s certainly no excuse. Somebody’s gotta be the adult.
I had a teenage girl essentially propositoin men when I was almost 30. It scared the he** out of me. I avoided her from that time forward. Grown women who are come onto by young boys can resist as can grown men who are come onto by young girls.
But, as we have seen in the news, and as many of us know first hand, the male and female adults don’t always make the right choice.
Sorry, “proposition.”
Good for you Eric!!! I am so proud of you!! It encourages me so much to see men of integrity. It really does.
I’d like to think that human beings have a responsibility to each other to do no harm, no matter the age. Surely adults confronted with a hot young thing (genders here in either direction) should realize that the young one is inexperienced (all the things you mentioned) and misguided in their attempts to seek education, approval and more. Heads might be filled with romantic fallacies about teachers and so forth.
Adults, real adults, need to find a way to safely avoid that situation, not give into their own egos. They may find the situation arousing, but that doesn’t mean it should be acted upon. Are you doing, or potentially doing harm to the youth? To yourself? To your marriage/relationship business?
Then stop, avoid, move away. Don’t engage.
I think that one factor that needs to be included in this is that boys and men are rarely taught how to say set boundaries or say no when sexual energy is directed at them (us). The prevailing heterosexual model is that men pursue women, so women don’t get much change to learn how to be the one who makes a move, and men don’t learn what it’s like to deflect or reject sexual attention. As a result, when girls act in ways that men perceive as directing sexual attention at them (whether they actually are or not), the men often don’t have the skills to stop it.
Not that this in any way excuses the behavior. But I think it’s a piece that needs to be integrated into the puzzle.
Charlie, what are the skills required to say “No, this is wrong?” I mean, I get your point. But what do you think needs to be taught? How?
In the case of the piano teacher mentioned above, he clearly knew it was wrong-he said so! He said he’d not do it again, but he did. Why then did he not quit the gig, stop taking her as a client?
I’m just not seeing the connection there between having skills to SAY no (as he would say so afterwards) and the unwillingness to DO the no. In that anecdote at least.
She was 11. My son is 11 and if I knew he was flirting with a 30 year old piano teacher I’d have a serious talk with him, about safety. I’d probably get a new piano teacher.
So, I’d love to discuss those skills and conversations so that we’d have more tools in the toolbox.
Julie- I think it’s more of an issue of men not having any experience saying no. The idea that we’re supposed to always want sex and that we’re not manly if we ever turn it down, the fact that we’re taught to be the pursuers and never the pursued (at least in heterosexual contexts), etc all reinforce men’s inability to set boundaries around sexual attention, wherever it comes from.
As far as why he didn’t stick to his boundary, I can’t say. Maybe he was worried about having to explain what happened (and being assumed to be a perpetrator). Or maybe this particular guy was a perpetrator. I don’t want to project onto him. All I’m suggesting is that if we want to expect men to be able to set boundaries, we need to create a climate in which men setting them isn’t seen as a violation of macho.
Oh, I’m all for that Charlie. I don’t disagree with you at all, I just wanted to hear more.
I see your point too Charlie, although the piano teacher guy mentioned above was undoubtedly at fault and your example in NO Way applies to that example in particular.
That said, no young man or any man should feel unmanly about not wanting to be intimate. esp if its some stranger coming on to him. I would just view a man who said no to some female coming on to him as a clean man who had integrity and morals. In other words I would see him as more manly for saying no. After all, I would want the man in my life to be able to say no to tempation and would see him as so much more manly, clean and strong and desirable to me if he could!
Just my lil two cents re that. 
Also, I find a man a lot more attractive the less women he has slept with. Definately.
Charlie, that’s absolutely right. And that’s exactly where the follow-up to this piece will go.
I look forward to that follow-up.
Having studied some clinical psychology years ago, I recall it’s very common for patients to behave seductively with their therapists (even Freud talked about it happening), however, it is the therapist’s responsibility to maintain professional boundaries. Similarly, young people can and do develop intense sexual crushes on those who are older or in positions of authority (teachers, professors, coaches, employers, U.S. presidents, etc.) However, the adult always has the moral and legal responsibility to make sure that those feelings do not lead to anything, especially if the young person is a minor, or is in a position where he/she could be exploited or harmed by the relationship. Or just looking at it from one’s own self interest, is it worth the risk — political scandals, prison, termination, sexual harassment lawsuits etc? One of the benefits of being an adult is having (hopefully) developed the ability to think carefully about the consequences of one’s actions.
Why did you gender the piece?
You know the answer. We all do.
There is an obsession over how many different ways can men and boys be called rapists. Check the history. It’s about 50% of this blogger’s posts. Are over 50% of men rapists? Really? Are 50% of the readers here rapists? I mean, come on. You gotta desperately want to castigate males to imply that most males are rapists.
I couldn’t tell from the information in the article if Deborah really was a victim who requires therapy. It sounded to me like in her own mind she was not a victim and that she had very much come to terms with it. I did note that she said she had a mixture of pride and shame, but that could happen with all sorts of personal history.
I guess it probably wouldn’t hurt for her to see a therapist, but I think it’s odd to jump to that conclusion because she didn’t feel the things that we assume she’s supposed to feel. I certainly do not feel comfortable coming to any conclusions about her psychological needs just from what little I read in this piece.
Is therapy simply universally recommended for anyone who had a similar experience?
That being said, just because she doesn’t feel victimized doesn’t excuse what he did. Maybe she doesn’t need professional help, but I’d say the piano teacher definitely does.
“Seduction” to me means convincing someone to do something that he/she doesn’t really want to do. Like you’ve cast a spell on a person and he/she has no more agency. That’s a very romantic concept, but it’s a fairy tale. Either a person consents or a person doesn’t consent. Ultimately, that piano teacher did what he did because he CHOSE to do it. It was not something done to him. Feeling tempted and being seduced are not the same thing.
Children cannot seduce adults, because no one can really seduce anyone else. If someone truly does not have the power to consent or the power to say no, then it’s rape. If a person consents to it, then it’s not seduction.
I would point out that it’s a common perspective among pedophiles that it’s the children who seduce them, and that they are helpless before children’s overwhelming sexual power. Quite convenient for them to think that they have real control over their own behavior. People have been using the “I was seduced!” excuse for millennia now.
Here is my question: Why is it wrong for a 14 year old to have sex with an adult and in what way will it harm them? Can a sexual relationship between a 14 year old and a 40 year old ever be good thing?
I think if I were 14 and I got seduced by a 30 year old teacher, I would be very happy. I don’t really see the problem.
You are joking right?
nope
Regardless of age, I don’t think it’s ever right for a teacher to sleep with a student, even if the teacher is actually younger than the student (this can happen at the graduate level a lot). It’s a conflict of interest and an abuse of authority. This goes for piano teachers, after school tutors, school teachers, and college professors.
I do think that it’d be quite a rare relationship between a 30-year-old and 14-year-old that is balanced and egalitarian, but it is also at least theoretically conceivable. 14-year-olds are generally speaking inexperienced, naive, and emotionally vulnerable compared to 30-year-olds. But that’s just on average.
The truth of the matter is that a lot of people have crappy first-time sexual experiences (yes, usually as teenagers!) in which they feel taken advantage of, and it’s not really that much worse to have it with a peer (or someone slightly older) than with an adult.
I remember being 14 and tiny. I didn’t really see that much of a difference between a senior (17 years old) and a young adult (28 years old). They were all old and big, as far as I was concerned.
“I do think that it’d be quite a rare relationship between a 30-year-old and 14-year-old that is balanced and egalitarian, but it is also at least theoretically conceivable. 14-year-olds are generally speaking inexperienced, naive, and emotionally vulnerable compared to 30-year-olds. But that’s just on average.”
Why should it be balanced and egalitarian? I mean why couldn’t an older woman/man also be a mentor to someone younger. Why do they have to be equals. Why does a sexual relationship have to be egalitarian? Many relationships like for instance teacher/student, parent/child, mentor/mentee are not egalitarian.
I was inexperienced when I was 14. I would have appreciated someone who was an experienced, generous sexual teacher. I think it would have been fantastic.
Am I the only one who watched Private Lessons and was incredibly turned on?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhirL4494FY&feature=related
This is horrific. As an adult who was “seduced’ by a 37-year-old man when I was a 16-year-old girl, I can say without hesitation that it was a damaging, painful, confusing and ultimately debasing experience. Yes, I felt a budding sense of my own power and beauty in his attraction to me that I had never felt before – but I was a *teenage girl.* I wanted love and protection – and looking back I absolutely wanted it in an age-appropriate way… Instead, I was essentially seduced and raped by someone who would have been considered a pedophile had I been male. Instead, people like you consider this “mentoring” and an exercise of my agency.
I gladly attest that I had no agency. There was no real consent when I had no real power to give such. Do I think for one second that I was an agent in these events or responsible in participating in the seduction?
Does your answer change when I tell you that I was an acne-faced girl, overweight at 210 pounds and 5’6? Hardly a Nabokovian minx.
Chances are that guys your age might’ve also taken for granted someone not viewed as conventionally attractive. “Ugly” girls generally get worse treatment, regardless of the age of the guys. It’s not fair, but that’s what it is
depends what you call worse sometimes…. being used for ones body is not better..
” Instead, I was essentially seduced and raped by someone who would have been considered a pedophile had I been male. ”
Since 16 year old generally have adult bodies…i don’t consider someone interested in a 16 year old a pedophile. I would call him a gay male.
I understand you find it horrific but I you haven’t really explained why.
“Does your answer change when I tell you that I was an acne-faced girl, overweight at 210 pounds and 5’6? Hardly a Nabokovian minx.”
I don’t have a Nabokovian fantasy. I am not strongly attracted to 16 year old girls. I am saying that when I was 14 and even younger that I fantasized about having sex with a much older woman. I think the fantasy is quite common among boys. And I think it would have been great if it had happened.
I don’t doubt that there are 14 year old girls with the same fantasy and I don’t see what is wrong with both the fantasy and the reality. I also feel like maybe you have taken your adult perspective and used to reevaluate what happened to you when you were 14. I have seen women do this before. I don’t understand it. If you enjoyed it when you were 14 why is that a bad thing?
How was it damaging? debasing and painful. Is this do to you judging it based on societal norms after the fact?
No, assman, it is because she feels an inner sense of loss and like she wasnt valued. She answered all of your questions. You need to read with an attitude of truly trying to learn even if it is uncomfrotable for you.
Hi Karen, Lisbeth’s sense of loss over not being valued has little to do w/ the age discussion going on here except that at the time when she was being used for a guy’s temporary gratification, guys here own age probably felt more peer pressure to avoid being w/ an “ugly” girl. The older guy didn’t feel that same pressure so he felt more free to be a dirtbag. And I say dirtbag because he used someone & made her feel like crap afterwards, regardless of her age.
However, Lisbeth making herself available to someone because at first he made her feel differently than the other guys did is her own responsibility. If it was a guy her own age who used her & threw her away, she might still feel bad about it now. She’s just using the age thing to fit in w/ this conversation. Besides, she was 16, which is the age of consent in various states & countries.
Lizbeth,
I am proud of you for having the courage to share that. You did answer each of assmans points precisely. Sometimes because of people not wanting to face the truth, they dont listen closely enough. That was horrible what happened to you, and I am so sorry it happened. It was in no way your fault.
Why Assman?
Because sometimes things that feel good in the moment can lead to pain, innocence lost, regret, shame and even addiction in the cases of drugs in the long run.
It is a biological fact that the portion of a person’s brain, either male or female that is responsible for sound and balanced judgement, the frontal lobe, is not completely mature untill the age of 25!
For this reason, and many other obvious ones, like someone thinking cocaine feels good in the moment like you were talking about how fantastic being sexualized by an old person at 14 would be, but later will lead to regret shame by the culture, wishing she has saved her virginity for someone more interested in her as a person than in some unequal relationship just wanting to get off on her sexually and many other reasons along these lines are the obvious answer to this question. You are a predator if you think that is okay over an out. Discusting and evil and totally selfish to take advantage of a minor. Yes they act mature. Trust me, I work with youth, and she will be tormented by anger and regret when she is older. There is something in all women girls that wants something far more special, HONORING and valueing than that whether the culture has taught her to give up on her needs of being truly honored and valued by this age in her life yet or not. It is criminal to take advantage of a minor.
“Here is my question: Why is it wrong for a 14 year old to have sex with an adult and in what way will it harm them?”
If you are Eve Ensler and it is lesbian sex then it would be classified as a “good rape”
“I think if I were 14 and I got seduced by a 30 year old teacher, I would be very happy. I don’t really see the problem.”
What if that 30 year old teacher was male?
I am not gay and I wouldn’t have sex with a man whether I was 14 or 30. I am talking about consensual sex.
Yes you are talking about taking advantage of teenagers we are aware. Read my post and if you dont turn from this, I would be afraid to face the God who created and loves that girl one day when you die. I really would.
But to further reply, I don’t think there is anything wrong with a 14 year old gay adolescent having sex with a 40 year old man.
Is the reason you chose the online tag “assman” because unconsciously you feel like an ass or are you making fake posts to upset people. lol
It can interfere with natural sexual development and cause long term psychological harm.
Everyone seems to use Lolita as an example of a seductive little girl. But honestly, has nobody READ that book? The whole point was that Humbert’s behaviour led to Lolita’s destruction. He wanted her. He abducted her! He knew she was simply trying to gain some power in her little, ruined life, by acquiescing to his disgusting urges, and he took and took and took from her until she was an empty shell who ultimately died, wasted and wretched.
I was in the middle of the book…now I know how it ends…
That kid in California was 14 when he murdered a gay classmate because the gay kid insisted on repeatedly provoking the straight kid w/ unrequited flirtation. The straight kid should’ve learned how to settle it peacefully & his failure to realize that murder isn’t the answer deserves a harsh punishment. However, he’s being sentenced to 25 years (many more years than he had lived through at the time of the crime). He’s not getting out until he’s middle-aged. That seems too strong, but I understand that the family of the slain kid would probably demand a strong sentence.
The point in regards to this article is that teenagers are becoming viewed as more culpable for their violence than for their sexuality.
I’m not familiar with the case, but I would agree that society has some conflicting ideas about how responsible teenagers can be – in some states you can be old enough to get married but not old enough to consent to sex. At 16, you can be tried as an adult for murder, drive a car, drop out of school, get a job, decide whether or not to have an abortion (in most states), but are not adult enough to freely engage in sexual behavior (except with someone your own age.) You are also expected to pay taxes like an adult (sales tax, payroll taxes, etc.) even though you are not allowed to vote.
At 15-16, you’re sort of protected, sort of left to your own devices.
Why is whether teenagers are culpable for thier sexuality even an issue…. unless the person who is making an issue out of it just wants an excuse to pursue them sexually? lol
It takes a certain level of subjectivity to view others as always being subjective. Believe it or not, Karen, some people try to be objective.
I’m more sympathetic of females who get incarcerated for the statutory “rape” of sexually developed teenage males. Across the country there are quite a few 20 & 30-something women, usually high school teachers, who are serving time for sexual encounters with males who are capable of sexual encounters. The teacher-student relationship shouldn’t be clouded by sexuality so I can understand these women losing their jobs if that’s the case, but they shouldn’t lose their freedom. These males are responsible for the decision of whether or not to murder someone, but they’re not responsible for the decision of whether or not to have sex w/ someone? It doesn’t seem fair.
It seems to me that there are two separate issues that are being smeared into one, here:
1) Can the 11 to 14 set (let alone the 15-17 set) have sexual agendas? Yes indeed, they can. Children are not innocent blank slates whose sexuality magically turns on at the age of consent.
2) Should adults act affirmatively on children’s sexual agendas on the occasions these are directed at adults? No, obviously not.
So yes, a little girl can indeed try to “seduce” a 30 year old man, in her limited and totally inadequate notion of what seduction is. That’s quite normal. What is neither normal or correct is that the man act on this sort of thing.
But I’d like to ask a question: haven’t any other men here been in an awkward situation where a young teen is trying to clumsily hit on them? That has happened to me once and as soon as I saw where the kid in question thought they were going, I cut it off. One has to do this very carefully, however, so that the kid’s feelings don’t get hurt. And how does one tell a parent “Excuse me, there’s something you should know: I think your child has a crush on me” without looking like a sex pervert oneself?
Is it wrong to be in love with a man 23 years older than yourself?
Nope. If you`re under the age of consent, howeveer, it would be wrong for that man to act on his sexual attraction for you, however.
Differentt from Dr. Schwyzer, I do not agree that heterochronic relationships are necessarily or even mainly negative for the younger partner. As long as you`re over the aage of consent, I`d say you have a lot to learn from an older partner. I`m even in favor of relationships on the order of, say, 16/22. I don`t think that there`s anything necessarily wrong or damaging about that sort of relationship, either.
Yes Dr. Benway, I’m in agreement.
When the relationship is 30/50, fine. When it’s 14/14 or 14/17, fine (I’m not personally crazy about 14 year olds having sexual relations, but it’s not wrong). When it’s 18/22, fine. It all comes down to the perspective provided by experience (sexual and life in general) at each age point.
Also, from a gender perspective, the meaning of and reasoning for sexual relationships, to girls, is often quite different than that of boys. This is why Assman doesn’t see why a 14 year old girl wouldn’t be happy to have the same type of relationship with an older man as he described being happy with if here were a 14 year old boy. In order to understand the differentiation, you would have had to experience life as a 14 year old girl. Alternatively, I don’t understand what it would be like for a 14 year old boy because I have never been one.
Depends on how old you are. And if all you’re doing is nursing a crush on the guy.
@Hugo: The word “seduce” means “to be led away” or “to be led astray.”
). Or, in layman terms, “Come to me!” (and that’s exactly its core meaning).
The original, latin word “se-ducere” means “to led to oneself” (I know, I’m Italian: latin grew here
Your interpretation of the word seems both erroneous and misleading.
@Hugo: No adult is so weak that he (or she) is powerless to refuse sexual temptation, much less from a child. As powerful as the libido is, it is not so strong as to trump the will.
Actually, libido is very often much stronger than willpower (and this goes both for men and women), and we see the effects all around us. This phenomenon has always puzzled human beings from ancient times, and yet it happens.
Perhaps that’s the way Nature makes us reproduce no matter what; if willpower would trump libido, we would have waaaay much less children.
Hugo, your idealism is amazing: you blindingly insist that things are what you think they SHOULD… instead than how they really ARE.
If you believed pigs can fly, you would swear you see them flying all the time.
Having said this, I agree with your point that the adult has the full responsibility for what happens. And, in no way his weakness (or the teen seduction) is diminishing his responsibility.
I just doubt the adult is always able to do the “right” thing; and history proves me right again and again, I’m afraid.
Crescendo, please consult Lewis and Short’s Latin Dictionary, or any good online etymology outlet for the origin of seduce.
Absence of willingness is not the same as absence of ability.
I consulted many Italian sources (being my own language closer to the Latin root) and, although there are some different opinion, most agree with your interpretation.
Looks like I have been misinformed. Sorry.
Is it sub + ducere (to be led under?) Just curious. My Latin was 50 years ago.
“Many children are hungry for attention, and many girls, sadly, have learned that the best way to get that attention is through their sexuality. ”
This is just so on key. I think something we are hugely missing out on in this society is positive adult male role models that give non-sexual attention toward young girls and young teen girls and that aren’t family members. It’s so important for young boys to have positive adult male role models but we seem to forget how important it is for young girls to also have positive adult male role models that show them things about men and mascunlinity in non-sexual ways and how to relate to it so that young girls aren’t using just their sexuality to garner the wrong kind of attention when what they really want is some love and affection from a good man.
“positive adult male role models that give non-sexual attention toward young girls and young teen girls”
Why can’t sexual attention be positive?
In what situation would sexual attention toward a young girl or a young teen girl from an adult male would be posiitive assman?
In the same situation it would be positive if it were between an adult male and an adult woman. In situation where both people like each other, they enjoy their time together and they make each other feel good.
Except young girls aren’t adult women. They aren’t fully developed phyiscally or emotionally. They might be in the beginning or middle stages on their way to womanhood, but they aren’t fully developed. So I’m sorry, but older adult fully grown men wanting relatoinships/sex with young girls does not seem positive to me at all. What seems positive to me are when older adult fully grown men want to mentor young girls to help them in the world in a non-sexual fashion so they can successed beyond sex.
“I think something we are hugely missing out on in this society is positive adult male role models that give non-sexual attention toward young girls and young teen girls and that aren’t family members. ”
Wrong. That’s not the problem. What we are missing is family for both boys and girls. That’s what family is for. They’re called fathers, uncles, and grandfathers, both maternal and paternal. If there are such, as there should be, those gentlemen likely have friends that might also be helpful in a bonus sort of way. Regardless, the main adult males in boys’ and girls’ lives should be the ones connected to them by family ties. If the family is intact, any others are just extra.
Yes Eric, fathers and family members are the most important key role in the develop of children more then anyone else. However, I stand firm that the over sexulaziation of girls from non-male family members is also harmful toward young girls because they not only learn to relate to the world through how their family members treat them but through how men not in their family treat them as well. And I think that young girls and boys both need adult positive male role models that aren’t family members and that don’t give them sexual attention. Usually men tend to focus on how much young boys need positive male role models that aren’t just family members. Young girls need this too. But if every women and girl is sexualized by men not in her family, she is learning a powerful message. Just last week there was an article about how much more younger women/girls are sexuliazed in movies then even 21-39 year old women.
What exactly do you mean by “over sexualization”? I mean, these are children; so, in my view, there is no such thing as “OVER sexualisation.” ANY sexualisation of children by an adult is weird and sick, and indeed harmful if the child becomes aware of it. However, there is no evidence that such is the rule rather than the exception. Most adults (family or not) who deal with kids don’t sexualize them at all, let alone over sexualize them. The largest set being teachers and the many other adults who work in schools.
“And I think that young girls and boys both need adult positive male role models that aren’t family members and that don’t give them sexual attention.”
There’s lot of such people around, such as teachers and other school personnel. There are often adults in the neighborhood, at church, or elsewhere who kids may benefit from getting to know. Nonetheless, such persons are ancillary relationships, not core as are parents, uncles/aunts/grandparents, etc.
“ Usually men tend to focus on how much young boys need positive male role models that aren’t just family members.”
I don’t know this to be factual. The problem that is often pointed out is that boys’ are separated from their fathers, grandfathers, uncles, etc. for one reason or another. Thus, there is a need for other men to fulfil some of the boys’ need for those relationships.
“But if EVERY women and girl is sexualized by men not in her family, she is learning a powerful message.”
Now, this is just silly. What is your evidence that EVERY woman and girl is sexualized by men not in her family? (Most women and girls are not in movies.)
I do think much of this is “historically specific” (pertaining to our time and place.) Yes, girls and boys need to be trained for their roles in bureaucracies (causing us to have “adolescence” where some societies don’t.) Yes, we have to be repressive because our social organization tries to depend on fairness and merit (that’s the good side of anti-sexual harassment measures.) Yes, the family and community aren’t there as much as they were in times or places past. Yes, traditional societies have plenty of what we’d identify as “victims,” some of them traumatized. We too. Certainly there are rule breakers and norm evaders in every type of society. I think sex with an adolescent is a pretty bad idea for an adult male, but there were societies where it was more common. Read Richard Burton’s (the explorer’s not the star’s) ethnography of Northern Africa in the 19th Century. When I’ve had non-heterochronic (great term!) relationships, the woman was 26-42. Never a student. Once a former student.
As a teenager who has been approached numerous times by men who were in a position of trust and authority (ie., HS chemistry teacher, college pre-professional advisor, and after school mentor), I don’t trust any man in a position that allows him to be alone with a young naive girl who is trying to focus on her academic achievement and career…I have told my stories to the heads of those institutions and, believe me, if I had told the truth way back then, those people all would have lost their jobs or gone to jail…. “Seduction” by a minor is such baloney…if you could have watched what had happened on a cellphone camera like we have now, there is no way you would believe that a child is anything more than an innocent child who depends on the supposed adults around her to provide and protect, and who often fail miserably…..