What the hell?

Carl Simons’ column caught my eye in [issue 10.04]; the topic, “Sex with individuals under 18.” That title immediately struck me as a bit “how to” in tone, but I pressed on, certain I was mistaken.

Then, there it was—the word “victim,” including quotation marks. That says it all. My first impression was correct, although in this case I get no satisfaction from being right.

I shudder to think of my own community getting so carried away in our push for acceptance that we find ourselves devoid of boundaries. That ain’t progress friends. As the editor of a widely read publication, you serve as a filter—get to filtering!

Chris McManigal
Los Angeles

Simons responds:

I am always glad when a dialogue about preventing such behavior occurs. Having worked on such cases for over 15 years in both criminal and civil capacities, as well as serving as an advocate on behalf of both "victims" and "perpetrators," I can tell you that many times these cases are very complex and not as clear cut as they may seem. Often baseless sexual battery/pedophiliac allegations are made and are simple disguises for ingrained homophobia toward a family member, partner of a family member or neighbor. These allegations are consistent with the right wing mentality that homosexuality=pedophilia. The text of the article contains numerous warnings to respect the legal age boundaries, not to engage in such behavior and to be on your guard for getting drawn into such a situation.

After personally reviewing both your letter and the article, and sharing both with a number of lawyers and non-lawyers, and after counting the approximately 12 warnings that exist in the text of the six paragraph article, we were all rather perplexed at how anyone could reach a conclusion that the article encouraged such illegal behavior.

The article was intended as an open and honest discussion about sex and sexuality of those under 18. The use of quotation marks around the word victim was done to shed light on a few things: most importantly—as was brought out numerous times in text of the article—that, ironically, it is very possible that the individual labeled victim in a case, is actually the sexual aggressor in the case. Such a situation does not make the act any "less" illegal. The quotation marks were also used to highlight the extreme naivete of the law in that many people under 18 engage in some sort of sexuality; however, any such behavior is presumed illegal under the law in many states.

Mr. McManigal, if you or anyone reached a conclusion that my article somehow encouraged sexual relations between underage and overage individuals, I offer my deepest apologies.