"... there's no arguing that the grown woman-paperboy thing is qualitatively different from the football coach abusing youngsters in his care."

Why not? If you want to convince people that "older women+younger boys" is somehow worse than "older men+younger girls," you have to at least offer an argument of some kind. Assuming that your readers are implicitly aware of the criteria you're using to make this assessment is not going to change people's minds, and it doesn't really move the debate forward in a meaningful way. Simply saying it doesn't make it so.

The data cited in the linked Slate article looks at the historical record, which is all well and good. But I'm curious: Given two identical situations, in which the age of the adult and the age of the minor remain constant but the genders are flipped, does the adult man still deserve greater punishment than the adult women? And if so, why?

"while their sentences are, on average, shorter than sentences given to male offenders, the main reason is that their crimes are objectively less vile."

As a woman, as a mother, and as a woman who was raped over twenty years ago, I must disagree with the statement that a woman who commits rape has committed a crime "less vile" than a man who commits rape. Whether it's the victim or the rapist who does the penetrating, rape is rape.

I'm sorry, but I still don't see how a woman having sex with with a teenage boy is rape. "Statutory rape" is an oxymoron anyway. A teacher is an adult with authority over children and these women obviously shouldn't be given this type of authority. But I think there is a big difference in who does the penetrating and statuatory rape, if consentual, is not rape.

This is being over simplified. It comes off suggesting that because boys are somehow just predestined to put their dick just anywhere, if its an older woman its okay. What happens in your mind if a young boy and his older teacher have sex? Is that not quite as vile as rape if the older, male teacher is seducing the young boy into penentrating him? But somehow 'rapier' if it's the other way around? Wanting to have sex with a youth just makes you weird. Whether you are a full on pedophile or some misguided person with arrested development attracted to teenagers that have begun to develop some of the physical aspects of an adult... In either event, teenagers should be having sex with other teenagers, consentually, safely, with some pride enough to try to make it meaningful and special. But never with grown ups. The equality of mindset just isn't there even if its a seventeen year old who is technically a physical adult. It's pathetic that a grown person could be so dettached from a healthy attraction to other grown ups.

Boys are predestined to stick it anywhere, and from what I remember, they couldn't wait to do it. In a world where children as young as 10 years old can be tried for crimes as an adult, why can't we concede some responsibility to a 13 year old for his own body and his own decisions. If he wants to have intercourse with an older woman, and she agrees, let them have at it. Apparently Vili was hitting on Mary Kay Letourneau, not her seducing him. And they are still together. The parents are at fault for not explaining to their son risks he is taking when engaging in intercourse, ie pregnancy, STDs. People don't realize 13 year old kids are having sex with each other all over America. They hear about it on the radio and they see it on TV. And they want to do it. So either engage in some active parenting and discourage this kind of behavior, or let your pubescent kids run wild. Of course teachers shouldn't have sex with their students. These women deserve to lose their right to teach children, but they don't deserve to go to jail. Most people will disagree with me, but teenage boys...and girls...are not as innocent as we like to imagine. Middle school and high school weren't that long ago for me, and I remember having lots of crushes on older men, including a couple cute teachers. That's why they called girls like me jailbait, and it would have been my decision to engage in intercourse with those men. I could see if the kid was coerced or if he was prepubescent, but he wasn't. So give the lady a break.

"The data are startling; women who having sex with young boys are wrong and deserve punishment, just not as much as the average, and far more numerous, male abuser."
Come on now that can be viewed as a sexist comment. What if that was your son? I dont think mothers would take to kindly to this.
The fact is it was flexing power which is what rape is about. Your article is basically saying boy will be boys. keep that in mind the next time a male teacher decides to get a piece of the cheerleader. Than people wonder why boys grow up to be sexist pigs.

"Now if we could just figure out why a love of children can lead to sex and how to stop it."

The reason why is fairly simple. These "children" are sexually mature and in other times would be fathering and mothering children. We evolved to make them "sexy". Unless there is force or coercion it is unclear that there is an natural crime involved. Socially, we want "children" in their place, so the idea of equal relations between adults and teens is a social abomination. Maybe the crime is in societal attitudes towards teens.

i don't think her point is that sex crimes against minors committeed by men are more vile simply because men committed them. overall, male abusers are more likely to use force or threat of force on their victims than female abusers are. for citations, etc., philip tromovitch has a body of work on the subject. clearly its wrong for teachers to have sexual relationships with students, regardless of age or gender. and once people are past their late teens, or perhaps early twenties, they should understand that teens are off-limits sexually, even if they may be "begging for it". yes, physically they may be developed, but there are big differences in mental/emotional maturity that make such relationships morally questionable, regardless of consent, to say the least.

Psychology is as powerful a weapon to overpower a person or at least manipulate them as physical force is. Sometimes I don't think these teachers are really raping in the narrowest definition of the word. Still, what's pathetic and creepy is that they are even attracted to teenagers. I guess because at this point in my life I need to be on the same plain with a person to be attracted to them.

One crucial piece of information when consider if sex is consensual is the fact that Young adult brains are not fully mature until they are in their mid-20s. A teenager is unable to fully engage the entire situation because their minds do not yet have the capacity to function at their highest levels. This is continually being tested and proven through modern medically and psychological experimentation. It is a shame we push children and teenagers into a mold they are not ready to wear. SEXY is not something we should desire any of our children to be.

The problem of teachers having sex with kids is of the same brand as a psychologist having sex with a client. The teacher and psychologist are in a traditional role where their students/clients will naturally (hopefully) grow to trust them, respect them, honor them, and need them in some way. It is only natural that the students/clients form crushes on the teachers/psychologists. It's wrong because of the nature of the role setting up the crushes. It's too easy for the teacher/psychologist to take advantage of the immaturity and weakness of their charges. Giving in to feelings in these cases can cause great harm to the client/student. Anyone crossing these lines should be disbarred, and fired, even if it's an adult. If the victim is a child, be it a boy or girl, even if consentual, that person should spend time in jail, because they are preying on someone weaker and less sophisticated.

Appalled mom, I agree with you. And with Suzanne. The sexual interactions I had at a young age were not with people in positions of authority over me. This is somehow inherently wrong.

I wish I had had the opportunity to have sex with a female teacher when I was 14. It would have saved me years of ignorance, heartache and emotional distress.
Sexual activity is normal and should be allowed to occur whenever possible after puberty. Given meaningful consent and contraception of course.

Debra Dickerson, you have got to be kidding. You are a blatant sexist...shame on you.

Would you like to explain your theory of why "female abusers are rightfully punished less severely" and, when a female has sex with, let's say her 12 or 13 year old student, it is as you say, "objectively less vile" than if a man were to do the same with his female student?

Seriously, can you back up your statements with some specific reasons why you feel this way?

If you think about what you are saying, it's pretty bold.
You are saying that it is less wrong for the female than it is the male. That means you must feel that there is a certain amount of 'ok' in it when the female does it.

Are you saying that in general, men are more vile than women? Nice. That's called sexism.

So your Father, Brother, Grandfather etc are inherently more vile than your typical female? Ok.

Your kind of thinking makes no sense whatsoever and is totally self serving. I guess your attitude makes it ok for you and your girlfriends to flirt with young boys without it being 'wrong'.

Oh but don't let a man flirt with young girls...that's vile!

Give me a break. Unbelievable. You are a blatant sexist, Debra.

Jaime says, "i don't think her point is that sex crimes against minors committed by men are more vile simply because men committed them. overall, male abusers are more likely to use force or threat of force on their victims than female abusers are."

Ok Jaime, so are you saying that in those many instances where the man uses no force, and the young girl is 100% willing and wanting it, that it is then ok or then on the same level of 'vileness' as when a boy is consensual with an older woman? This happens all the time, and whether or not the girl was consensual is not taken into consideration in the courts.

I understand that older women are very aware and a bit titillated by the fact that young boys are 'wanting it' all the time, but what makes you think that this is a factor, and what makes you think that girls of the same age aren't 'wanting it' very much as well?

Why is it that so many women think that because boys are horny, they are somehow justified by giving the boy what they want, but if a man does the same for a 'horny' girl, he is being 'vile'.

This attitude is self serving for these women. They need to admit the obvious: they think it is ok to flirt and maybe even have a little fun with a young boy.

They want to be able to do it, so they justify their feelings by saying it is different when men their age feel the same way toward young girls as they do toward young boys.

News Alert: there is absolutely no difference. It is exactly the same amount of 'wrong' either way.

Debra Dickerson's attitude toward this subject is exactly why this is happening more and more in our society. Pathetic, Debra.

Debra says (in a hauntingly matter of fact manner), "There's no arguing that the grown woman-paperboy thing is qualitatively different from the football coach abusing youngsters in his care."

Okeydokey. When I was a kid, one stopped being a 'paperboy' at about 12 or 13 years old.

I also remember a couple of my high school, male coaches having relationships with girls in my school. Mind you, they weren't raping them forcefully, but everyone knew they were having sex.

So, according to Debra, the housewife who lures a 12 or 13 year old boy into her home and 'boffs' him (she playfully uses that term to describe adult woman and 14 year old boy sex) is less 'vile' than my PE coach who was having consensual sex with a senior girl at my school.

Nice, Debra. I'm just trying to get a read on where you are
coming from, and I think I have accomplished that.

Basically, you're kind of cool with, let's say a 34 year old woman 'boffing' a 14 year old boy, but you are not cool with a 34 year old man 'boffing' a 14 or even 16 year old girl.

Wait, when a man that age has consensual sex with a teenage girl, you don't consider it to be 'boffing' like you do when a woman that age has sex with a 13 year old boy, right?

'Boff' away, Debbie! I know some 13 year old boys who would love to deliver your paper! ;)

If a man had started this article the way Debra did, for example, "The latest male teacher caught boffing his young female student got busted in Mexico", Debra and her like would be outraged, but she can playfully describe a woman screwing her 14 year old lover as 'boffing' and it is ok.

What a joke!

The latest male teacher caught boffing his young female student got busted in Mexico. Even man-haters take the weekend off, but you can bet that come Monday, the left wing blogosphere will be afire 'proving' that men are monsters and that male criminals benefit from a double standard in public reaction and come sentence time.

These are crimes, to be sure, whatever the perp's gender but there's no arguing that the grown man-girlscout thing is qualitatively different from the female cheer leading coach abusing youngsters in her care.

According to William Saletan at Slate, both should be punished but male abusers are rightfully punished less severely and regarded with less animus:

What do you think about that, Debra? Does it sound just a tad sexist? Uh, so do you, genius...

Gee Debra,

We've all made some good points here, and you don't respond...what's up?