- Was it actually rape? If it was, what's the proper punishment for these 8 year olds? Lengthy time in juvenile detention center will guarantee that the rest of their life is in the gutter. Is there a way to punish them without ruining their lives? I find it hard to believe that kids that young are beyond repair. - If it wasn't rape what should the punishment be? This isn't a case of naughty teenagers. They aren't even preteens. - What type of damage was done to the girl? - What were these kids families like? - Why are they even considering charging 8 and 9 year olds as adults? - I didn't even know what the true purpose of my junk was when I was 8. There's no way they got any sort of rush out of this.
We really need more details on what actually went on. Sex is not really possible at that age, it can only be emulated. I guess the first question should be how far did they go?
I'm having a difficult time making any type of judgment on this case. It's honestly shocking.
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sex is possible at that age. It is also possible for kids of that age to get some "sort of a rush out of this."
As to this particular case, I know nothing about the kids or what actually did/didn't happen. I am speaking of general possibilities, and of course the particulars will vary from individual to individual.
---
Edited to add: from the most comprehensive recent medical survey in the US, the NHANES III, the age at which 25% of boys have experienced genital pubertal development is 7.5 yrs to about 8.9 yrs, depending on racial subgroup. The overall average for boys is still more in the range of 11-12 years old, but significant numbers are developing much younger.
As with girls, puberty is generally occurring at younger ages than ever before.
Edited again to add: However, children can be more or less sexual creatures at just about any age. I say this not to titillate or invite abuse (god forbid!), but because think it is important not to be surprised at sexuality or sexual acting out in kids. You cannot be prepared for or ready to handle (in a well-thought-out way) that which you cannot believe ever occurs.
I think it's important to recognize that this may happen, to have thought out ways to keep our kids protected from the negative consequences of sexuality when the issue arises, even if they are quite young, and to make sure the children under our purview aren't placed in situations that may not offer them that protection from others who could take advantage of this emerging aspect of their lives.
posted
Thanks for the stats CT (is that an ok nickname?), but I still have a hard time believing that even 25% of 9 year olds can have a complete sexual experience. Clearly they can physically act it out, but is the emotional component really there? Were those 25% between 7.5 and 8.9 actually ejaculating?
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Threads, I am not sure NHANES is that complete. I'm also not sure how comfortable I am with discussing things at this detail, especially given that much of what informs me is direct patient history and examination. I will try to be both accurate and maintain discretion.
I would not say that one did not have "sex" if one did not ejaculate -- is this what you mean, or am I misunderstanding you? At least as it is commonly used, orgasm is not required for either partner for "sex" to have occurred. I suppose "complete experience" might limit that concept still further, but -- even though vague -- I don't think the unmodified term of "sex" is ruled out here, and I was going by the unmodified use in the original post of "Sex is not really possible."
Regardless, I am clinically certain that some (not a majority, but a significant number) boys of this age have developed to the point where they have erections, can maintain them through penetration, have sexual impulses and curiosities, and are informed of the sexual experience enough to anticipate it. Some can and do ejaculate. Even if they didn't, I wouldn't call sexual intent with vaginal penetration by a penis "not sex" -- by the usual meaning of the words, I think it is appropriately termed "sex."
---
If it matters to you to know what the demographics of first ejaculation are, I can try to find that for you. (Unless there is good reason, I'd rather not, but I am willing if it is truly indicated.) I don't think that it really matters to the original post, though. On the other hand, I can assure you that child psychologists do identify sexual fantasies and intent in at least some children of this age.
I would call that "emotional content," but I am not sure why one would necessarily tie that to ejaculation. Sexual intent and sexual action of an abusive nature are what I would worry about with the boys in the article, not whether or not they managed to ejaculate. Excepting the issue of pregnancy, of course. But ejaculation itself wouldn't be a distinguishing factor for me between
1) abusive and not abusive 2) worrisome and not worrisome 3) sex and not sex etc
---
"CT" is fine. Whatever makes it easiest.
---
Edited to add: I realize this may be contrary to individual experience, but I don't think that is really a problem. I have been involved in the care of literally thousands of boys, and I was trained by people with much more experience than me on data gathered from tens to hundreds of thousands of children. The range of normal variation I have seen is quite, quite wide, so I wouldn't be surprised that if one knew only a few dozen kids intimately like this, one may find it surprising. I am still surprised myself sometimes.
posted
Nowhere near enough details to really form an informed opinion of this, but off the top of my head...
I don't think that at that age they fully understand what they are doing, or the severity of the wrongness. Certainly they shouldn't be tried as adults.
Without more details I can't say anymore, we just don't know what happened.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: I don't think that at that age they fully understand what they are doing, or the severity of the wrongness. Certainly they shouldn't be tried as adults.
I would agree with you on all counts.
I'd also note that kids who sexually act out at young ages often (not always, but often) have experiences of abusive nature of one sort or another in their own backgrounds. Certainly that does not make anything such children do okay, but it is a reason to push for getting some very qualified people in for assessment and help. Sometimes the justice system is very good at facillitating this, sometimes it is absymal, sometimes in between. I hope strongly for the first of those.
posted
I'd be surprised (if that's the right word for this sort of thing) if the three boys actually accomplished the act of penetration at that age. That is not to say the girl could not have been sexually assaulted. I'm not sure the girl was "raped." I hope an accurate depiction of the event can be found.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: I'd be surprised (if that's the right word for this sort of thing) if the three boys actually accomplished the act of penetration at that age.
BlackBlade, I'll reiterate that 25% of US boys at about this age are in at least Tanner Stage II of genital development, which is a stage at which spontaneous erections, nocturnal emissions, and sexual interests do occur. That is to say, it is certainly physically possible for a substantial number of boys at that age.
I would certainly hope that a substantial number of boys at this age would not be doing this, of course, but that should go without saying.
---
Look, you may rightly judge that none of the children you know may be capable of this. You are also unlikely to know children who are likely to or capable of commiting acts of this level of violence against other children. That's a good thing! But it doesn't mean that it is impossible or that just the possibility itself is very unlikely in general.
Again, I think this is important because it is impossible to prepare for this if one is not aware of how childhood development in general does progress. And children at this age, especially as they go into puberty, are quite vulnerable to exploitation by others (which is much more likely than their abuse of others, of course, although that is possible, too).
---
Edited to add: And I'll try to refrain from reiterating this point again and again in this thread, as I am uncomfortable with the role.
But please understand that I am a pediatrician with a special interest in endocrinology, of which puberty plays a big part. I hope to do a fellowship in pediatric endocrinology here in Canada once my paperwork is settled. That is, the endocrine system in children is my given area of interest, and I am even more pendantic about it than most things medical. The fact that puberty and sexuality is an area fraught with stories of abuse and potential negative consequences just makes it all the more important to me that information about this be accurate.
I know next to nothing about what actually happened in this particular case, but I do know a great deal about what technically could have happened, and I know about the demographics of pubertal development because that is, specifically, what I am professionally trained to know.
quote:Originally posted by porcelain girl: [QUOTE]Originally posted by BlackBlade: [qb] I'd be surprised (if that's the right word for this sort of thing) if the three boys actually accomplished the act of penetration at that age. That is not to say the girl could not have been sexually assaulted. I'm not sure the girl was "raped." I hope an accurate depiction of the event can be found.
I wouldn't be surprised if they accomplished penetration, and even if they didn't I don't know if wouldn't still call that rape.
I agree with CT and the others that they should not be tried as adults. In fact I am just going to go ahead and say ditto on everything CT posted.
edited to add: it is still sexual assault, either way. What is the legal/medical definition of rape?
Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
I don't think there is a clear medical or legal definition of "rape." This came up in a thread in the last few months, and I read up on it pretty thoroughly. I think "sexual assault" is the term primarily used in the medical and legal professions, and "rape" is primarily a lay term.
Not that it really matters much, actually. What the persnickety details are is not as important in figuring out risk and what to do as the problem of sexual assault of children in general, and I'd hate to see that people believed this girl must be erroneous in her claims just because they believed the behaviors weren't physically possible in boys of this age (if penetration is what was claimed by her). Not that anyone has done this -- just that I worry about it happening.
And that's at the heart of my objection to the idea that these boys couldn't have done what we think was described, really. If a child comes forward and says X happened, but we (erroneously) do not believe X could happen, then we will believe that the child is -- at least in part -- lying, or misremembering, or misinterpreting what happened. If we are wrong, that can be devastating.
Of course, such a child could be wrong for any number of reasons. That is always a possibility. But I'd rather assess that without being under a cloud of assuming there is necessarily an inaccurate story being told just because I didn't know enough about what was possible, you know? That colors so much of how we see the situation. It can have a strong effect on how we interpret the victim's claims, and it becomes so much easier to assume that it wasn't so bad after all, since we are sure the victim must have gotten it wrong in a pretty big way. It may have been, though, and such claims may indeed be an accurate recounting of what happened.
---
Edited to add: Again, I don't claim that anyone here was doing that. I merely want to make sure this forum discussion doesn't end up contributing to that mindset, in this case or otherwise.
posted
In thinking more about this, I am pretty sure my knowledge of the child abuse story in the US informs my attitude.
I will dig up details of the history later. Basically, the gist is that the first pediatrician to majorly publish on child abuse in the US estimated that roughly 200 children were significantly abused each year across the nation. This was in the mid-20th century.
He was roundly abused and villified. It was taken for granted (and passionately argued) that natural adult or parental instincts would prevent a person from being capable of doing serious harm to a child. It was obvious to other physicians that he was wrong because they extrapolated from the conviction that nobody they knew could ever do such a thing.
(Unfortunately, that too was likely wrong anyway, since abuse is pretty constant across social strata and occurs in "good families" as well. It is very, very hard for a physician to suspect abuse in a family that he or she knows well, and so often even egregious cases that come through the ER are denied as possible by the family med physician or pediatrician known by the family. But it does happen, and if you don't acknowledge the possibility, you cannot assess objectively.)
200 cases per year across the country, and this was "impossible." Talk about tip of the iceberg, even then. Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd like to remind everyone that they've only been charged with the act, not convicted. I think that it is especially important with children this young to remember that they are innocent until proven guilty. I can remember a similar case in Chicago around a decade or so ago in which several young boys around 8 or 9 years old were accused of raping and murdering a girl, but ended up being innocent of the crime.
I agree that the questions Thread brought up are important, but I do think that it's important to avoid jumping to conclusions before a jury has had a chance to rule on it.
Posts: 2437 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just want to thank Hatrack for existing, and especially all of you experts and informed individuals who are willing to analyze and explain the daily news in such detail.
Thank you CT. I would regularly have read the article, shaken my head in sadness, and moved on. Thank you for taking the time to go through what you know.
quote:I don't think that at that age they fully understand what they are doing, or the severity of the wrongness. Certainly they shouldn't be tried as adults.
This is how I feel as well.
Posts: 1711 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I remember reading about a 4th grade girl getting raped by two fifth grade boys a few years back and thinking that was awful. Things are moving younger and younger these days.
Unfortunately, this is all too possible. TV means that kids don't have much to imagine as far as how to use the apparatus is concerned. They probably understood it was wrong, but not HOW wrong it was. I don't know what the solution here is, but it's very very sad.
Maybe we should go back to the days of non-co-ed schools. It's not a real "fix" but maybe it would step things down a notch.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by DDDaysh: Maybe we should go back to the days of non-co-ed schools. It's not a real "fix" but maybe it would step things down a notch.
Do your really think this would be a step in the right direction? I think it's the opposite of a real "fix." How is it a solution to...we...segregate the sexes?
Posts: 1711 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Didn't this happen outside of school? I don't see how separating the sexes would solve this particular problem. I'm inclined to say it would make it worse or have no effect at all.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
CT: Perhaps you misunderstood me. I certainly agree with you that they COULD have raped her, as in actually penetrated her. I meant I would be surprised if three boys of that age psychologically could have done it. They would have had to hold her down while all three did it. I certainly can believe its POSSIBLE, I am just not sure these boys did it this time.
When I say rape I mean actual penetration, sexual assault for me can be anything from groping to probing with an object. At least that is what we were told in Criminal Justice class.
posted
BlackBlade, unfortunately I have met some very, very vicious children of that age (both boys and girls) and they tend to gravitate toward one another, in my experience, and the one with the worst impulses often has no trouble convincing the others to participate in wrongdoing when adults are not around. It's sad, but it does happen, and just one really violent and messed-up kid can instigate several others to participate in his/her violent and cruel acts.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: BlackBlade, unfortunately I have met some very, very vicious children of that age (both boys and girls) and they tend to gravitate toward one another, in my experience, and the one with the worst impulses often has no trouble convincing the others to participate in wrongdoing when adults are not around. It's sad, but it does happen, and just one really violent and messed-up kid can instigate several others to participate in his/her violent and cruel acts.
I certainly agree that this is true. But it also takes an incredible amount of conditioning for a boy of that age to learn what rape is and to build up the will to do it.
As an aside I agree that they should not be tried as adults, but they, and to a greater extent the girl, need some serious counseling. I'm so glad the victim in this instance informed her mother, I could easily see this happening and going unreported.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know about conditioning, as much as abuse. I agree that at least one boy has probably been abused and/or stood by and witnessed abuse (which is abuse in itself.)
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I certainly agree that this is true. But it also takes an incredible amount of conditioning for a boy of that age to learn what rape is and to build up the will to do it.
The latter part I agree with, but hell, man, I knew exactly what rape was when I was 8. I had vague ideas about many different sex acts, what they constituted and why they were desirable from song lyrics and porn shown to me by classmates. Because I was 8, didn't fully understand any of it and thought discussing extremely misogynist lyrics and porn with my parents was taboo (it wouldn't have been), I was left to draw my own conclusions, with help from my equally uninformed classmates.
If a little boy watches, for example, his father being sexually abusive of women at home, and receives no contrary influences, could he think that this is, if not acceptable, then at least desirable behavior? I can see it happening. With CT's 25% capability figure, it starts to sound pretty plausible to me.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
erosomniac: When I was 9 one of my best friends and his brothers exposed me to their father's pornography collection. I knew what I was watching was sex but its one thing to know the process and quite another to watch it in action. It just did not process in my head what I was doing until later. It definitely had strong effects on me later, I hate the fact it happened to me, but it did and I deal with it. I didn't word my previous post very well. I meant, "know" as in mentally understanding what rape entails, being able to conjure up the motions.
I probably knew what rape was in 1st grade if not earlier. But the thought of actually doing it was repulsive to me. I know that for some people their sexuality makes domination a very satisfying experience. I can see the factors that would have to be in place for this sort of thing to happen, but I'm still withholding judgment until a better picture comes out.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, to continue comparing and contrasting:
When I was 9, I sold my vote in the student council election for $7; my friend wanted a girl he liked to win. I had absolutely no idea that what I did was dishonest, wrong or immoral; I had never been taught morality with regards to franchise. I even wrote out a receipt that we both signed and got copies of, because I had been taught that that's the proper thing to do when you make a cash transaction for something with perceived value (this is, ironically, how my mother found out).
How many kids are told explicitly that rape is wrong on a level beyond the expectation that we'll respect the bodies of others? Couldn't a child who has never had it explicitly or implicitly explained that sexual assault & rape are heinous crimes equate violating a person's body in this fashion on par with punching them? The latter is still a deviant behavior, but substantially more tolerated and widespread, even if it is a male hitting a female.
Edit: I echo the consensus that there's nowhere near enough information in the article to draw any sort of reasonable conclusions about what happened here. Frankly, I'm not sure I want to read the article where enough information IS presented.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank you, [The White Whale!], so very much. I hope you understand what it means to read that.
---
BlackBlade, I'm not surprised that any given child is/was not in a position to do this. I also doubt that selecting a child at random from the many millions in the US would find us one capable of this. But we are not in the position of picking someone out at random; we are being presented with a self-selected case. That is a different beast altogether. [With regards to probability, that is. I am mindful of ricree101's appropriate concerns that this case is in the stages of charges, not conviction, and that we do not know the details. I am speaking of probability that some child could do this, not that these particular children could or did do this -- no moreso than I am speaking of whether BlackBlade could do this, for example. (Which I am sure is "no" in his case!)]
Among the millions of kids in the US (~72 million under 18 yrs), would I be suprised that a few kids among the millions in the country are capable of this? Not really.
Most kids would not emotionally/mentally be able to do this [warning: link is to case description in technical but graphic terms of severe animal abuse], but yes, there are apparently some that are. Few enough that we'd be hard-pressed to find them randomly (say, as a poster here at Hatrack ), but yes, some, somewhere out there. It may be rare -- quite rare -- to see this, but this particular case may well be that quite rare one. Whether you or I would have done it has little to no bearing on that, unfortunately.
If only everyone were like us! Alas. *only somewhat tongue-in-cheek
---
And what ketchupqueen said, and fully agreed with erosomniac about the (potentially welcome) dearth of specific information in this particular case.
posted
Recall as well that the extremes of earlier onset of puberty in boys are similarly matched at the other end of the Bell curve for later onset. About 25% of the boys aged 11-12 have not yet entered Tanner Stage II of development, and that is perfectly normal.
It's about 50-50 in ages 9-10, but those still remaining totally prepubertal at age 12 still comprise a significant number, similar to the earlier starters. I expect a lot of men picked at random here would not have been early starters, simply because most boys aren't.
That doesn't mean there aren't some that are, even if it is totally inconsistent with the personal experience of one of us from a different cohort. That just reflects the wide range in the variation of normal.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know I was looking at and enjoying (with erection) porn at age 9, if that is helpful in the conversation. I fully believe a 9 year old can rape another child.
Posts: 264 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by porcelain girl: What is the legal/medical definition of rape?
I don't know about in the US but - in Australia (and, I would venture, in most criminal codes), the actual elements of the crime do not depend on the age of the perpetrator.
The issue where age becomes relevant is criminal responsibility - so in a case where the actions may fulfill all the relevant criteria for a sexual assault, it may be because of the age of the accused, they are not criminally responsible for their actions and therefore did not commit sexual assault.
Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Exactly, scholar. As I said, that's why I hope they have some very well trained people to assess and help all who were potentially involved, in any way possible.
---
Edited to add: Thanks for weighing in, imogen. That makes sense.
And you too, enochville.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
