THE DEBRA LAFAVE PLEA AGREEMENT

There have been a handful of cases over the past few years in the U.S. involving women teachers who have slept with adolescent male students who were below the age of consent.  The most famous offender is probably Mary Kay Letourneau. Debra Lafave is another, more recent offender.   

It appears as though the criminal charges against Debra Lafave have been resolved.  For multiple acts of sexual intercourse with her fourteen year old male student, she will serve three years of house arrest, four years of probation, register as a sex offender, and undergo sex offender counseling.  Prosecutors in two different counties were originally insistent that Lafave serve prison time but backed down, apparently due to pressure from the victim and his family.  At the most recent court hearing, a psychologist testified that having to testify would be detrimental to the victim, particularly given the glare of the media spotlight in this case.

Boy, can I feel the prosecutors' and victim's pain on this one.   In some of my cases when I was a prosecutor, I had young children who simply could not bring themselves to mouth the words of what happened to them.  I had teenaged victims flat out refuse to testify.   I had parents beg me to drop charges because the prospect of trial was destroying their child.  In such circumstances, the prosecutor's choices are: (a) retraumatize a reluctant victim by forcing a trial; (b) drop the charges in the hope that the victim will be come back to pursue  charges again when he or she is older; or (c) take whatever plea bargain you can get, on the theory that it is preferable to get sex offender registration, counseling and supervision of the offender in place in order to reduce th risk that the offender will re-offend.  Faced with situations where the victim desperately wants to avoid testifying, I generally went for option c.  But it was always frustrating and painful to do so.

I don't get the sense that Lafave's gender played into the result, except in a roundabout way.  The prosecutors were originally insistent upon jail time and changed their tune only at the request of the victim's family.  The judge in the second set of charges refused to endorse a no-time deal, stating that letting Lafave off without prison time "shocked the conscience of the court."  It appears that both the prosecutors and the judge would have pushed for prison time, but for the victim's desire to avoid trial.

The way that Lafave's gender played into this, however, was in terms of the intense media attention to this case.  This was due to the fact that reported instances of female-on-male statutory rape are very rare, and the fact that Lafave was so good looking.  The media attention in turn increased the pressure on the victim, which in turn led to the plea bargain.

Imagine how this boy felt with sayings like this all over the internet: "Stop saying that teenage boys who have sex with their hot, blonde teachers are permanently damaged. I have a better description for these kids: lucky bastards." (Hat tip: Chalice Chick for the quotation.) A young boy who has been victimized is thus the object of derision; he may question his masculinity if he feels damaged when he supposedly he should be feeling "lucky."

Stereotypes about how a young boy should react to sex with an adult woman are the direct result of old-fashioned patriarchal views regarding gender relations.  At one time , all 50 states had laws against seduction but only women could be victims of seduction. The crime of seduction was the act of using artful persuasion to influence a woman of previously chaste character to depart from virtue.  The assumptions underlying these laws were that (1) women did not have sufficient decision making and moral capacity to consent to sex, (2) men, rather than women, always initiate sex, and (3) women, but not men, are damaged by premarital sex.   We encounter some of those same anti-feminist attitudes today when people assume, based on gender, that a female offender is less at fault or that any young boy worth his salt should be happy to have had the opportunity for sex with an adult woman, particularly if she is considered attractive.  Thus, we see how patriarchal attitudes can hurt men as well as women. 

The fact that Lafave is being held  responsible to any extent is due to the rise of feminist mores in our culture.  Under our criminal laws, she is considered to be just as morally responsible for her actions as a man, and the statutory rape of a boy by a woman is considered just as reprehensible as any other form of statutory rape. I should note that, although Lafave received a more lenient deal than prosecutors wanted, her sentence isn't exactly a cake walk.  Her freedom on house arrest will be very limited.  She will have a number of requirements to fulfill on probation and if she screws them up, she could be sent to prison for the maximum sentence allowed for the crime she to which she plead  guilty.  She can never teach again and she is notorious throughout the country as a sex offender. 

There is no question that female-on-male statutory rape needs to be taken seriously.  Fortunately, due to feminist attitudes, we are much farther on our way to an appropriate response to these cases than we were in the bad old days. 

Comments

[Scheherazade]

But isn't there at least one good reason for treating male-on-female statutory rape differently than female-on-male statutory rape? That is, a woman can't have sexual intercourse with a man unless he has an erection, which means at least at some level he is choosing to do it. Whereas a man can force himself on a woman who is definitely not aroused. To me, this is a difference that matters -- the experience will probably not be physically painful to a male victim, for example.

I'm not saying that I don't think statutory rape can be a problem when it's a male victim, or that there's not a serious imbalance of bargaining power, etc. It's probably fair to treat minors as though they don't have the capacity to make sensible choices about sex up to a certain age, for both young men and young women. But there seem to be physiological differences in the sexes that makes a male 'victim' different than a female victim if the crime is sexual intercourse with a minor. You can't physically force a man to have sex if he's not aroused; that's not true for a woman.

Am I wrong about this?

[pdf23ds]

The problem is that arousal does not equal consent. People, especially males, can become aroused when frightened and not consenting, at the sight of a naked form, or from talk about sex. To say that the arousal of the victim makes the offender any less blameworthy is to say that the victim "really wanted it". And victim blaming isn't OK whether the victim is male or female.

On the other hand statutory rape isn't the same as other rape. While a 14 year old may not be able to legally consent, I have no doubt that there are many 14 year olds that can morally consent to sex. Was that the case here? Don't know.

[The Happy Feminist]

Terrific and thought-provoking question. It crossed my mind as I wrote this post that sex is one area where male and female experiences are extremely different physiologically, and therefore possibly psychologically. I don't mean to blithely imply that male and female victims have identical experiences. Nor do I mean to imply that it's such an easy thing to be even handed!

If a girl experienced pain during a statutory rape, it may be appropriate to consider that an aggravating factor during sentencing. The degree of coercion, if any, on the victim is relevant to sentencing as well, and it may mean a more serious charge.

BUT I don't think that a boy's physiological arousal necessarily means he was fully consenting. In fact, I think a boy's physiological arousal, while physically pleasurable, may be damaging emotionally. If the boy regrets having sex with the older woman, the fact that he enjoyed it on some level and was an active participant might make him feel worse. (Female victims have told me that their physical arousal during coerced or statutory rape has made them feel incredibly confused and guilty and angry.)

Even if the boy has no regrets about having sex with the older teacher, the fact remains that he is not considered old enough under the law to make a decision to risk contracting STDs or fathering a child. Therefore, the teacher is morally culpable for causing or allowing an underage person to take these risks.

I think the law is correct in providing identical maximum penalties for both male-on-female and female-on-male statutory rape. But I also think that prosecutors and judges should make individualized sentencing determinations based on the specifics of each case. (Of course, the problem with individualized sentencing determinations is that irrational biases may affect the result.)

[pdf23ds]

Of course, the problem with mandated by law sentences is that the irrational biases of legislators, far removed from the specifics of any case, and closer in fact to the irrational whims of scared and bloodthirsty voters (e.g. three-strikes laws), may affect the result.

I'm sure you know this, THF. Just sayin'.

[TangoMan]

There have been a handful of cases over the past few years in the U.S. involving women teachers who have slept with adolescent male students who were below the age of consent.

More than a handful - check out the numbers in my post January - National Have Sex With Your Teacher Month.

Thus, we see how patriarchal attitudes can hurt men as well as women.

Actually, you haven't led us to see any such thing for all you've done is make some assertions but they in no way support the conclusion that you draw.

the statutory rape of a boy by a woman is considered just as reprehensible as any other form of statutory rape.

I disagree with your usage of "is considered" when I think it is more accurate to use "should be considered." I certainly don't get the sense that there is any sort of equivalency at work.

Fortunately, due to feminist attitudes, we are much farther on our way to an appropriate response to these cases than we were in the bad old days.

Here's the problem though - there are quite a few young teenage boys who would actually want to be in this teacher's bed. The problem is really an abuse of authority rather than the actual sexual encounter. So, I wouldn't be too quick to trumpet feminist attitudes or appropriate responses, for this isn't the optimal case to illustrate the point I think you want to make.

I don't know of any boys who were victimized by their teachers but I do know 2 men, who were initiated into sex by neighborhood women, back in the 1970s, when they were 14 and the women were in their late 20s. They report that their short lived affairs were the best things that happened to them in their teenage sex lives. They completely avoided the faux bravado of their peers but also felt that their confidence in dealing with girls improved as did their level of performance, which just made the teenage sex that the encountered in the years that followed much more rewarding. Notice though, that these women weren't in positions of authority over the boys and couldn't exert coercion in either inducing the act or in maintaining the affairs.

At the most recent court hearing, a psychologist testified that having to testify would be detrimental to the victim, particularly given the glare of the media spotlight in this case.

The way you've worded this indicates that the media attention would be an added source of anxiety for the teenager, when the article actually makes the point that it is only the media coverage that is the source of the anxiety - "A psychiatrist who examined the teenager told the judge previously that the boy suffered extreme anxiety from the media coverage of the case."

[The Happy Feminist]

Long time, no see Tango Man.

We see how patriarchal attitudes hurt men as well as women because the notion that a man or boy should always want sex will (I infer) damage a boy who felt coerced into having sex with an attractive woman when he didn't want it. (I don't know how the boy in this case felt about having sex with Lafave so this point may or may not apply to the Lafave case.)

The statutory rape of of a boy by a woman is considered just as reprehensible as any other form of statutory rape in that the law provides identical maximum penalties for both crimes. Whether it is considered just as reprehensible by people in general is another question.

I am sure a lot of teenaged boys dream about sleeping with Debra Lafave. For all I know, the victim in this case was glad to have sex with her and had no regrets afterwards. I also know female statutory rape victims who had were glad to have sex with older men and had no regrets afterwards. But even so, the victim was not legally old enough to make the decision to take the risks attendant with sex. The victim was also not old enough for us to assume that he knew his own mind. Thus, the defendant is legally culpable regardless of how willing the victim.

You are correct that the media attention may have been the only source of anxiety for the victim in this case. Your point is well taken but that doesn't change my argument that Lafave is culpable and that feminist attitudes paved the way for her to be held responsible.

[The Happy Feminist]

Right on pdf23ds. Sorry I keep missing your comments because I've been mine at the same time!

[toy soldier]

Actually, the prosecutors were willing to accept the plea offered by LaFave’s attorney right from the start. It was the judge in the second county that refused to accept the deal that caused the “bump in the road” for LaFave.

The views about how a boy should respond are certainly traditional views, but they are hardly the fault of only men. Likewise, such views have yet to be challenged by feminism in any real way. The notion that women are victims, are somehow less responsible for their actions, and more damaged by sexual encounters than males are actually core principles of feminism. The only element that is anti-feminist the notion that LaFave is responsible for her actions, despite being a woman, and should be held responsible for them, despite her victim being male.

The actions of sex offenders like LaFave are only being taken seriously because of the effects of the media attention, and more likely because of the attention the priest sex abuse scandal gave to male victims a few years ago. Male victims were finally given some sense of validation that their abuse is wrong. Prior to that, it was never mentioned despite the near constant discussion of sexual abuse of women by feminists. The rise of feminism had very little to do with LaFave being charged with a crime, and even now few feminists are willing to discuss the effects of this abuse on boys without first blaming the victim and other males for abuse vicariously by point the finger at the “patriarchy.”

Certainly being on house arrest is not easy, but it is a far cry from being incarcerated. There is really no guarantee she will not re-offend or that she will not attempt to contact the victim, both of which tend to be common in these cases, or even that a violation of her conditions would necessarily send her to prison. Likewise, fewer people see her as a sex offender than they do a sex symbol.

Female-male rape does need to be taken seriously, and gradually that is happening because people are seeing past feminist attitudes that more often than not ignore, diminish or blame it on the male victim. Feminists have never considered male victims as equal victims, and the attitudes towards them tend to be hostile and rather dismissive. For feminists to take credit for the change in perceptions of male victims over the past few years despite routinely blaming the boys for their abuse is insulting to the numerous men’s groups like Male Survivor who have worked incredibly hard to raise awareness and provide resources for male victims of sexual abuse, something that no feminist organization does. And in many instances, it is because of feminist attitudes that male victims are afraid to come forward.

To the poster who asked about erections, as a victim of both male and female sexual abuse, I can tell you that erections are not controllable. What a boy’s body is stimulated by and what he mentally wants are two separate things. That is perhaps the worst aspect of it because those sensations are now tied to those violations and experiences. Even if it was enjoyed, the boy now has to struggle with what that means. If he decides it was wrong even if it felt good, he now has to worry about being labeled a “woman-hater” or a “fag,” the latter of which could result in physical or even further sexual assault.

[Lanoire]

FYI, many female rape victims lubricate and experience physical arousal during rape.

This DOES NOT MEAN CONSENT. And it can be very damaging to a rape victim to be physically aroused without consenting.

One thing, though, Happy--I'm not familiar with this particular case, but I'm leery of statutory rape prosecutions in general. Particularly of older teens. And I don't think having sex with, say, a 14-year-old is on the level of molesting a child. There are degrees of consent, and a 14-year-old is IMO almost an adult. Treating teens like they're totally incapable of making their own decisions can often lead to the oppression rather than the protection of young people, particularly young women.

[The Happy Feminist]

Toy soldier, Thank you for your thoughtful comment. I don't mean to imply that traditionalist, or patriarchal, views of female-on-male rape are "the fault of men." By "patriarchal" I mean attitudes that tend to assume the inferiority of women, such as the view that women are less capable of making decisions about sex or that women are more emotionally vulnerable to sex. Women, as well as men, can hold patriarchal values. Sure, I have heard quite a few individual men laugh about the idea of a boy being damaged by sex with a hot teacher. The fact that individual men (as well as women) may perpeturate these notions does not mean that I "blame men" in general.

In fact, I blame DEBRA LAFAVE for what happened. I only blame patriarchal attitudes to the extent that what she did is not taken as seriously as perhaps it should be.

There are many different kinds of feminism but feminism's core values are ensuring women's freedom, dignity, and equality of opportunity. These values to me seem to lead directly to the conclusion that Lafave must be held responsible. While the emphasis among feminist organizations may be on issues related to women's well-being, being a feminist does not mean you can't be concerned about other kinds of issues. For example, on this blog I have promoted an organization dedicated to ending prisoner rape, which is an issue that primarily effects men.

[The Happy Feminist]

Lanoire,

There has to be some sort of statutory rape law because the age of consent has to be set somewhere. (Otherwise, people could have sex with 10 year olds and then argue consent.) The question you raise is whether the age of consent is set too high. By nature, the age of consent has to be an arbitrary bright line distinction.

I am comfortable with 16 as the appropriate age of consent. I have met 14 year olds who seem like adults and 14 year olds who seem like children. Certainly, when I was 14, I think I was emotionally pretty mature, but physically I was only just starting to hit puberty and was even somewhat ignorant of certain important physiological facts about sex and STDs and reproduction (although I knew the basics). By 16, I had a much better grasp of the facts, and of my own position regarding the circumstances when I would or would not engage in sex.

Statutory rape laws do become very problematic when the offender is very close in age to the victim (such as the case of high school sweethearts). I support the notion of prosecuting statutory rape on teenaged victims only if there is a four or five year age gap between the parties. (Of course, forcible or coerced sex would still be prosecuted regardless of the ages of the parties.)

[will]

"FYI, many female rape victims lubricate and experience physical arousal during rape.

This DOES NOT MEAN CONSENT. And it can be very damaging to a rape victim to be physically aroused without consenting."

This was my thought as well when someone mentioned the boy getting an erection. It is incredible dangerous to equate arousal with consent.

In the context of a teenage boy, he is likely to get an erection when the wind blows so a grown woman can certainly generate an erection very easily. (Not that I am distinguishing grown men like myself. I can stop using Viagra and my pump any time I want!)

[j0]

Toy soldier: while I agree that feminist organizations have focused primarily on female survivors, I think that the safe spaces that feminist organizations gave to survivors of rape and sexual abuse and the raising awareness of the issue generally helped bring awareness of how widespread sexual abuse is generally. I think that this, indirectly, helped male survivors of sexual abuse because it made people more aware of the harm caused to victims of such abuse generally. In my book, feminism is interested not only in promoting the interests of women, but also in preventing sexual abuse of ALL people and helping victims of sexual abuse, male or female because feminists are acutely aware of the damage sexual abuse causes. But then, even feminists have a hard time shaking off all the internalized messages of patriarchal society, which is why organizations focused on the needs of female survivors AND others focused on male survivors are so important so that anyone who has suffered sexual abuse can find a safe place.

[chipmunk]

I have clients who have never touched a child, but downloaded pornography that involved children. They are lucky to get plea deals involving 10 years imprisonment. There are significant issues of proportionality and equity involved in this case that the news media is overlooking. However, it's beyond their grasp to understand some of the real problems because of society's inability to carefully understand sexual offenses/offenders and recidivist issues. If the defendant in this case wasn't so good looking, this case wouldn't have attracted the attention it has gotten, and the defendant would be serving prison time. Keep in mind, there have been a number of woman arrested since January of this year for the same charges. We don't see them highlighted on the CNN website.

[pdf23ds]

"Feminists have never considered male victims as equal victims, and the attitudes towards them tend to be hostile and rather dismissive."

Many feminists object strongly when these issues are brought up in discussions of female rape cases, as they tend to be hostile distractions. However, I'm sure their attitudes toward male rape victims in general are not as you characterize. I think all this is just a straw man, and a pretty cliched one.

"I am comfortable with 16 as the appropriate age of consent. I have met 14 year olds who seem like adults and 14 year olds who seem like children."

Harmful attitudes toward sex that pervade so much of our society make questions like this so much more difficult than they would be otherwise. Good sex education would make it to where most 12 year olds could make decisions about STDs and birth control as well as adults. But the fact is that we don't have good sex education in enough places.

And I'm not sure that statutory rape convictions in cases where both participants are morally consenting are really a big problem. Of course, there are always anecdotes. In fact, I think my father got called for jury duty on a statutory rape case involving a 20 year old man and a 16-17 year old woman, which he said was prosecuted because of the parents of the woman. I have a friend whose friend is being prosecuted because, allegedly, he committed statutory rape against a 15 year old at 18. He says the facts of the case are that he was passed out drunk and the woman took advantage of him. (His words are to be viewed with suspicion, of coruse.)

It might help to see some statistics on the age range of victims and defendants to see how common these borderline cases are. Unfortunately, I don't have the time at the moment to hunt those up.

[lcg]

I think one factor in these female teacher-male student statutory rape cases that no one is focusing on is the possible difference in motivations. Despite the many strides feminism has made, women in our culture are still very much judged on the basis of their youth and looks. I wonder if these women having sex with teenage boys aren't in some way validating their own need to feel young and attractive? I think there's still a very prevalent attitude in our society that women are valued for their sexual availability, or at least for conforming to certain ideals of beauty. I'm not in any way trying to undermine LaFave's culpability -- because I do agree that a line has to be drawn somewhere, and it should probably be drawn at an age older than 14 -- rather, I'm just posing the question: Could the motivations for women who commit statutory rape be different from the motivations for men who commit statutory rape?

[Ms. Cornelius]

Arousal, especially in the young who are hyper-sensitized, should not imply legal consent. Kids cannot sign contracts until they are 18. Their brain structure regarding impulse and decision making is still in development.

Further, I find it interesting that in our society we are extending the period of limited expectation of responsibility known as adolescence ever outward into the twenties, but at the same time sexualizing our children at ever younger ages.

Ever hear of NAMBLA? How many ADULT fanatsies involve intiating a novice into sexuality?

Debra La Fave got off easy. She is a rapist. She raped a child. And for this she gets no prison time?

[Ann]

A PUMP? Jeez, Will, this isn't THAT kind of a forum!

[Mrs. B.]

I TOTALLY agree with your post, Ms. Cornelius especially this part:

"Debra La Fave got off easy. She is a rapist. She raped a child. And for this she gets no prison time?"

I also thought chipmunk made a good point with this:

"If the defendant in this case wasn't so good looking, this case wouldn't have attracted the attention it has gotten, and the defendant would be serving prison time. Keep in mind, there have been a number of woman arrested since January of this year for the same charges. We don't see them highlighted on the CNN website."

The bottom line is that you should be able to send your children to school without having to worry that their teacher is going to try and have sex with them. Teachers are in a position of authority. I think if LaFave wasn't so pretty, she'd be in jail.

[will]

I agree with Mrs. B and whoever else said it. The postition of authority part is the part that bothers me most.

I really cannot get too worked up over a 16 or 17 year old having consensual sex with an adult who is not in a position of power. I have a fairly expansive view about what consititutes a position of power (friend of parents friend's parents in addition to the normal teacher, coach). I am not saying that it is a great idea. I just don't see much purpose in criminal sanctions under those circumstances.

Younger than 15 is just bad news.

[j0]

I agree with Mrs. B & others re: the teacher in this case and similar cases involving adults in positions of authority.

In addition to considering positions of power, I think we also have to look at issues of emotional coercion in addressing the question of adults having sex with teens. While physical coercion is more readily determinable and is clearly illegal (rape, regardless of the ages of the persons involved), emotional coercion has not really been legislated against and it would be difficult to do so because so much depends on the maturity of the teen object of the attempted coercion and their susceptibility to it. And because it is so individualized, I think that's where some of the patriarchal assumptions about older boy and girl teens and the need to protect them from adults unfortunately get applied - society thinks the boy got lucky and the girl got used.

[chipmunk]

When you're not an attractive blonde, you get jail time:

http://www.wchstv.com/newsroom/eyewitness/0603/060322-1.shtml

[evil_fizz]

I think that's disingenuous, chipmunk. The woman mentioned in that article was charged with assaulting multiple victims and plying them with drugs and alcohol. It's qualitatively different.

[Mrs. B.]

I basically agree with you, chipmunk, but I would add that:

'Your blonde and beautiful, therefore the media is interested, turning the crime into a 3 ring circus, therefore the victim decides he doesn't want a trial because he doesn't want HIS life turned into a 3-ring circus, so you don't go to jail.'

IMO, being blonde, and beautiful DID contribute to her getting no jail time because that's a big part of why the media picked up on the story.

[Glaivester]

A thought:

I think that to the extent that there is a double standard, it is based on the gender of the rapist, not the victim. If LaFave had been male, I doubt that most of the people who want to exonerate her (I am talking about people like Tangoman, I am not referring to those who dropped the charges against her, which is a totally different issue) would feel the same way, regardless of whether the victim was male or female. Likewise, if LaFave had had a Lesbian affair with a female student, I don't think that people would be up in arms over this more than they are now.