Are “Child Brides” The New Hotness? Apparently So/Not.

Case 1: The man is 33 years old. He begins dating a girl who is 16 and a Sophomore in high school.

Case 2: The man is 49 years old. The girl is 14 and Freshman in high school.

The age of consent in case 1 is 18 years old. The age of consent in case 2 is 16 years old. Both girls got involved in “relationships” with these men two years from the age of consent. These cases seem to be legally identical. You have two young girls two years away from the age of consent in “relationships” with men far, far older than they are.

In case 1 the couple dates until the girl is 19 at which point they become engaged. In case 2, the relationship is discovered, the girl is tormented by school mates and the shame the deed causes her family and kills herself.

The first case is the recently deceased Paul Walker of California and the second case is Stacey Rambold of Montana. In Mr. Walker’s case there has been an outpouring of grief regarding his recent death in a car accident and there’s been nothing but support for his fiance’ Jasmine Pilchard-Gosnell. In Mr. Rambold’s case there’s been nothing but condemnation and a demand on the part of sexual assault advocates that he serve 20 years in prison for having sex with Cherice Morales three times, once in his car, once in the high school, and once in his home. In the case of Mr. Walker? Absolute silence except in the case of the odd Perez Hilton article and some stuff on crushable (which hurts me to type). One is a creeper and one is a heart throb. Here’s two pictures for comparison.

The news has reported Rambold’s case in an unsurprising light stating repeatedly that he is a rapist and clearly seeking to portray the act in a legally realistic light while at the same time tying the act to the more vile pedophilic act of forcible child rape. We’re meant to believe that Rambold physically forced himself on Morales for which there is no evidence. This is a moral argument by the press, not a legal one. It’s to get hits. The reality is that a 14 year old cannot legally consent but, in this case, that appears to be the only thing wrong with the relationship between Rambold and Morales. Had she been 23 then their relationship could very well have been an employer/subordinate one.

I’m not making excuses here, I’m just explaining their literal relationship without the histrionics which we’ve had far too much of in one case and not nearly enough of in the other.

In the case of Walker, he met Gosnell when she was 16 and they started dating. One would assume that the parents must have approved of the relationship and they’d legally have to in order for it to continue. But, regardless, this was a grown man dating a Sophomore in high school. I’m roughly the same age now as Walker was when he started dating Gosnell. I absolutely cannot imagine doing so, at all, ever. And yet, there was no dust up, no complaints. No one bothered to worry as to whether Gosnell was old enough to make such a decision and, frankly, I do not at all believe that a 33 year old man interested in 16 year old girls remains celibate with her for two years. No one is condemning Walker. Walker’s death, if anything, has brought out the sentimentalists who seem to be mourning another Hollywood talent lost. But no one seems at all concerned that Gosnell’s parents let a 33 year old man get involved with their daughter.

So what’s the difference here? Rambold was Morales teacher. Beyond the simple age difference it’s an unequal pairing. He has power over her. She cannot consent both because of the age difference and because of their relative positions within the context of “school.” In Walker’s case, he was a mega star at the time. He arguably had more power and influence over Gosnell than any teacher ever could. Plus, he’s way better looking and he was rich. He’s a teen magazine picture come to life. For a young girl in high school I can’t imagine a more enticing and powerful image. But, she can’t consent, she’s 16. So her parents consent for her. How is that okay?

Would someone else consenting on behalf of a rape victim ever be acceptable in any other case? I’m going to go with no.

So, on the one hand we have a teacher and a student and on the other we have a world famous actor and a young girl. The outcomes are different. Morales killed herself although it’s completely obvious to me that she did so because she was being tormented by schoolmates and not because Rambold had “hurt” her. She did it out of the shame she was made to feel by a society that wants to call her a victim out of one mouth and a slut out of another. It’s clear Rambold was devastated by this, rapist or not, and he predictably lost his marriage. That tends to happen when you start sleeping with underage girls or at least I imagine it would.

Walker got away with statutorily raping an underage girl for two years and no one said boo. He’s beautiful, we don’t care. Women envied her and some wanted to be her. Teenage girls did, no doubt. Is this celebrity worship or just ignorance?

There’s no difference here that I can see except that in Gosnell’s case she had the “support” of her parents in the relationship. No one was making fun of her or shaming her every day at school. She was dating Paul Walker. She was a lady stud (little girl).

It seems to come down to this. If you’re going to rape teenage girls then you damn well better be famous and good looking in a harmless sort of way. Don’t be an average guy. Average guys are creeps. Average guys get 20 years in the clink, famous ones get vigils and tears.