Statutory rape victims are held liable for child support .. But only if they're Boys

When a teen boy is statutorily raped by an adult woman and he happens to impregnate her, he is liable for child support if the statutory rapist - An adult Woman, decides to have the baby (which means, his parents will have to pay for their son's child if they want to keep him out of jail).

In the case of County of San Luis Obispo v. Nathaniel J., 57 Cal. Rptr. 2d 843 (Ct. App. 1996), a thirty-four-year-old woman had sex with a fifteen-year-old boy and became pregnant. The woman was convicted of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor -- commonly called statutory rape. She decided to have the child, and after she gave birth to her daughter, she received Aid for Families with Dependent Children, and the county sought reimbursement for the AFDC payments from the father, the 15-year-old boy. The court held that the boy, a statutory rape victim, was financially liable for the child that resulted from his victimization.

There is little of the outrage we all rightly feel when, for example, a priest molests a teen male. It is the boy who is treated as a wrongdoer. At least some judges seem to think there are "victims" and there are "victims" -- and some "victims" are more worthy of society's outrage than others, depending on the gender of their molesters. That sort of thinking should be a concern to all of us, except male feminists and misandrists.

There are, of course, no reported cases where female victims of statutory rape have been held to a similar support obligation - unless of course one were to apply feminist 'thinking' in which case there would be mothers paying child support to fathers - after being declared victims of rape. Of course feminists are 'outraged' and everything about males is 'egregious' , when are they going to get with their program and give up their privileged double standard and sense of entitlement ?