So as we are seeing, local culture tends to decide what is a sex crime and what is not. What is considered a crime in many western countries, is simply seen as the norm in other countries.
If we look in the opposite direction were ultraconservative is the norm, the majority of the world sees oppression of woman by calling some things a form of a sex crime when the mainstream of world opinion is doing a WTF.
In classic examples where the Muslim culture is a bit fanatical, over the top, and out of touch with today’s society, the simplest thing like not completely covering your body with a burka is seen as overtly seductive and hence a sex crime. The rough equal in western society would be a woman going around in the skimpiest of g-strings. In that case she may be arrested for indecent exposure and or lewd behavior, and that is a mild form of a sex crime under the general description of seduction in the presence of children.
Even just being alone with a man or talking to a stranger is enough to get a woman stoned to death or some slightly lesser punishment where Sharia law exists. Examples of similar behavior are common in places where Sharia law exists.
So it is obvious what is a sex crime for a woman depends on what local society feels is the norm, but logic dictates there is no crime if there is no victim. In the case of women being accused of raping a male, that simply is not possible if the male is not sexually aroused. With no erection there is no vaginal penetration. In other words the male is willing and able by the time things heat up to that point and nature has taken over.
So in the case of the cheer mom mentioned in part 2, it is hard to say there is a victim and only the law makes the 17 year old male a victim, and that no doubt is confusing to him. It was clear he was an active and willing participant, although the prosecutor will do their level best to portray him as a victim to convict the cheer mom. Also who is to say the cheer mom was not seduced by the 17 year old. As we said before, this particular incident can generate a lot of debate, and one possible outcome is both can be a victim of laws that just go too far.
For most of the world people think outdated Sharia laws go too far and women are victims of the law and not victimizers of others.
In the case of women who traffic children for sex, the opposite opinion is the norm as parental instincts are triggered protecting children.
This brings us to the debate of what is a sex crime and what is not. We must consider nature’s roll in this as well and that natures age of consent is the age when procreation can occur. Man’s age of consent laws that range from 12 to 21 are meant to allow emotional maturity to catch up to physical maturity. However if we remove all medicines humans only live to about 50, and nature has is ready to reproduce in the early teens to compensate for that.
As all of this is a bit much to take in and your personal position can be anyplace along the spectrum of opinions, the only thing that is certain is we humans still have not figured this out yet as there is so much variation in opinions and sex crime laws.
