Girl: Mom forced genitalia piercing

Post Reply New Topic

One of them carried out a conspiracy to commit battery, and the other seems to have been the willing accomplice to a chronic child molester. I don't think I'm going to be championing either cause.

Just for the record, though...

Circumcision costs a guy 10,000 to 20,000 nerve endings, which are gone forever. There are various arguments made on the subject, but that one, in particular, seems pretty difficult to ignore.



Find the anesthetist in this picture.


The mom seems like a nut case, but it's unlikely that she accomplished anything more than to keep her daughter out of action for a little while. A lot of women have piercings done to increase their sensitivity. But that's as much as I'm going to say on that topic, since we're not in the Adult forum.

Morals? There's a male adult who has sex with the 13 year old child of his girlfriend and you think this child somehow needs to be taught morals?

It didn't say rape, and it also said she was in other sexual relationships. Just because she's a kid doesn't mean she's innocent. Had her mother spent any time teaching her that it's not right to sleep around when she was little, maybe she wouldn't have had sex with the boyfriend. ((Also note I'm not saying the boyfriend isn't a disgusting pedifile, because he is, I'm just pointing out it wasn't rape.))

I still feel sick about this.

If she is 13 and having sex with an adult man, then she legally cannot consent. Legally it *is* rape.

Legally maybe, but definition wise No. The law says she can't, but her mind says otherwise.

Yes, but in this situation, the responsibility is in the hands of the adult to say no. Rather than carrying out this brutal punishment on her daughter, why not call the authorities on her boyfriend, who was a statutory rapist?

Why doesn't the article say where the genitalia was pierced!??!?!

why does it matter?

Because depending on the site of the piercing we can judge just bad it was. If the mom pierced her labia together, that would be pretty messed up. A clitoral piercing however, would not be as bad; everyone seems to think they're great.

In some states, yes, but not in Florida. There it's: 794.05 Unlawful sexual activity with certain minors

The age of consent issue is, legally, a confusing mess. Under Canon Law, the age at which one knew right from wrong was 8, and as a result of that line of reasoning, many countries (and states) used to have ages of consent that were between 8 and 13. That's where the idea of "statutory rape" comes from - when a kid's too young to know right from wrong. But the age of consent started to be moved upwards in a number of places, and very dramatically in most of the US. So while Mexico still has an age of consent of 12, the majority of US states have upped it to 17-18. Florida, like Utah and some others, has one which is gender-based: males may consent at 16, but females have to be 18. (Does anyone really believe that a 16 year old boy is responsible, but a 17 year old girl cannot be?) And people under 18 are allowed to be tried as adults, on the theory that they know right from wrong and are fully responsible for their actions. People who are under 18 can also join the military, and can marry.

In law, there are two sorts of criminal acts, those which are malum in se (evil in and of themselves), like murder, and those which are malum prohibitum (evil because the laws proclaim them to be), like prostitution. In the old days, when ages of consent were based on knowing right from wrong, violating the age of consent was malum in se, but now you can only be sure that it's malum prohibitum, because nobody pretends that a teenager doesn't know right from wrong, or doesn't know what sex is.

From the article:

"A 39-year-old woman forcefully had her 13-year-old daughter's genitalia pierced to make it uncomfortable for her to have sex"

I assumed it was *not* a clitoral piercing, because everyone I have known to get one of these has done so to enhance pleasure during sex.

Still, there's a billion places she could have pierced. It's unfair to judge the woman without knowing what she did.

The woman might not have known about it.

I don't know that it matters where she was pierced, all that would show was whether the mom's judgment about piercing locations was as bad as her judgment re: how do deal with an overly frisky daughter. I see it as a matter of intent. It's undoubtedly assault, and battery, because the daughter didn't want it. If the mother thought that the piercing would have a permanent negative impact on her daughter's ability to enjoy sex, then it's also arguably mayhem. Whether or not she went about it in the most effective way is irrelevant.