The stuff I read in the news these days. . .

Sheesh.

Anyway, there's an ongoing debate now over whether there's a double standard in the case of sexual predators. According to WorldNetDaily, there is, with females getting off scot-free. The article features a long list of incidents, with photographs displayed, and I couldn't help wondering whether my reaction (and others' reactions) would have been different had the faces of suspects been male.

I suspect that had the faces been male, a lot of people would have wanted them imprisoned. Or even executed.

Emotion aside, there's a reason for the different reaction, and, like it or not, that is grounded in the inherent difference between the sexes, and the nature of sexual penetration.

Penetration is not passive. Thus, it is counterintuitive to see a boy who penetrates someone as a victim of the person he penetrates.

Sexually functional males of any age can in theory rape females of any age. It doesn't quite work the other way around. (When was the last time anyone heard of an underaged girl raping a grown man?)

But it's not politically correct to say this, because all victims are said to be equal. Thus, a boy having sex with a woman has to be just as much a victim as would a girl having sex with a man.

I realize that terms like "boy" and "girl" have become so emotional as to border on the inflammatory, but I don't know what terms to use. I've known lots of grown men who behave as and call themselves "boys" -- for various reasons. The reasons are complicated, and I know a gay "boy" is not a "good old boy" -- but the point is that the term does not necessarily denote a minor. Analysis is further complicated by the varying ages of consent and adulthood. 17 year olds (the age of many of the WND victims above) are often called "men" and "women" and are in most states over the age of legal consent. Yet the newspapers use the word "teen" and "child" when guns are involved even if the perps are 19.

Age matters. And so does sex. (I refuse to say "gender.")

While I don't see reports like this every day, it does happen that grown men are victims of sexual assault in non-prison settings. Even (assuming the allegations are true) tow truck drivers:

A Chester County towing operator accused of drugging and sexually assaulting three former employees faces more charges, this time filed in two states.

Yesterday, Pennsylvania State Police charged Mark Ethan McFall, 41, of Coatesville, in connection with a fourth Chester County case. On Wednesday, Brigantine police filed similar charges in Atlantic County, bringing the number of alleged victims - all former male employees - to five.

Police said the latest Chester County case involves the rape of a 19-year-old worker on Sept. 25, 2003. McFall, a former South Coatesville police officer who ran McFall's Towing in Valley Township, drugged the employee, handcuffed him to a weight bench, and forced him to perform sex acts, police said.

The victim said McFall, who boasted of ties to the Mafia, told him that the "test of loyalty" would serve as the victim's initiation. The victim said McFall threatened him not to tell anyone, the criminal complaint said.

I suppose that a female tow truck company operator could have theoretically done the same thing that the male suspect is accused of doing. But a young girl sexually assaulting a grown man? It's a stretch. There's still such a difference between the sexes that a man (well a "real man" -- if such things exist anymore) would have a serious credibility problem bringing such a charge.

Is this, um, "relativism"?

I can offer a couple of murky examples from my personal knowledge. One homeless man I knew was being dogged for child support because he had fathered a child with an adult woman when he was underage. I thought there was an interesting legal issue (because he may have been "molested" and because normally society does not consider minors legally bound by contracts), but the homeless man insisted on living up to his responsibilities as "a man," even though he was incapable of paying a dime.

In another instance, a group of teen thugs (purportedly heterosexual -- if that matters) were in the habit of routinely beating, robbing, and sexually abusing an older gay man. The gay man was a drug dealer who loved the abuse. But who were the abusers? Had the police raided the place and the thugs been dragged down to the police station, once the consequences of parental and legal involvement kicked in, I'm not so sure the law would favor the older gay drug dealer who loved the "abuse."

I'm not trying to be obnoxious here; I just don't have answers.

Nor, it seems, does the "system."

(The problem is compounded by the fact that the older I get, the less I know.)