California’s New Child Sexual Abuse Law
Pop singer Michael Jackson was charged with multiple felony counts under the new California child sexual abuse law and this piece is not really about Jackson or if he did or didn’t do this or that. It’s the definition of “this or that” that worries me...
Under a California law that defines molestation of a child 14 years old or younger is defined as "arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust, passions or sexual desires of.”
If we take that definition seriously then reruns of “Baywatch” will more than likely do that to any boy (and some girls) 11 years or older! That means the producers of Baywatch, the (mostly female) actors wearing bathing suits, the TV stations running the episodes before the hours of 11 p.m. can all be charged with inciting sexual passions in a child.
Those Victoria Secret’s ads would also do that same thing, as would the Miss America or Miss Universe Swimsuit competitions.
Allowing 13 year old boys to be within eye shot of girls in gym shorts at a local Middle School would also seem to violate the wording of this law, so every school better put up an eye-proof barrier between the boys and girls during PE, which of course would allow the girls to file class action law suits for segregation from school PE equipment, which would be clearly sexual discrimination under U.S. law.
This law, patterned much after the wording one would expect to see in Iran or Iraq, where a woman who poses for a Madenform Bra package cover or ad can be put to death for showing her undies (and one woman from Iran actually faces such charges for doing pictures in a bra, she will be stoned to death if ever caught by Iranian police and convicted by the courts in Iran), is a little extreme, don’t you think?
Under this law the 8 year old sister of a 12 year old boy is technically guilty if she allows her bathing suit clad Barbie doll to be readily viewed by her brother.
I’m serious! What this law says is that anything that gives a boy under 14 a “woody” is a felony.
Now this law will certainly be a deterrent to the Catholic Priesthood in California (especially if they put Michael away for 3 to 8 years, which is what the law says they are supposed to do if he gets convicted), but that seems to be carrying things to an extreme. I mean if daddy dumps mommy, then marries a 25 year old secretary from work and junior get a whiff of her, tells his therapist how daddy’s new wife turns him on, well dear old dad can be charged with conspiracy to arouse and step mommy goes behind bars just for being an attractive woman! Hey, that the letter of the law (I'm sure there was a debate about stoning as punishment, but they probably thought the Supreme Court wouldn't have that much of a sense of humor)...
It’s going to be interesting watching this law and the Michael Jackson test case go through the appeals courts.