Take our user survey and make your voice heard.
crime

Man arrested for allegedly paying teenage girl for sex

70 Comments

Police in Kagoshima have arrested a 34-year-old man on suspicion of paying a minor for sex at a hotel in Miyazaki Prefecture in March.

According to police, Yujiro Yokobori, an accountant for an auditing company in Kagoshima City, was apprehended on child prostitution charges, Kyodo News reported. Police said he has admitted knowing the girl was under age.

Police said Yokobori took the girl to a love hotel at around 6:40 p.m. on March 16, after meeting her on a social networking site earlier that month. The two spent around two hours at the hotel. 

The incident came to light after one of the girl’s parents found out and called police.

© Japan Today

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

70 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

an accountant for an auditing company in Kagoshima City, was apprehended on child prostitution charges

That accountant need to account that girl age, before doing his action.

-8 ( +8 / -16 )

It takes 2 to tango.

18 ( +38 / -20 )

It takes 2 to tango.

No it doesn’t. Minors can’t legally consent, making it one sided.

-16 ( +22 / -38 )

That accountant need to account that girl age, before doing his action.

Lol I bet that sounded better in your head than in print.

11 ( +16 / -5 )

Japan need to solve the root cause. They need to regulate and arrest the hosts and underground idols who are the ones sinking the young girls into heavy debt

-5 ( +9 / -14 )

So no more listing of the age in news articles anymore?

13 ( +15 / -2 )

No it doesn’t. Minors can’t legally consent, making it one sided.

-4( +4 / -8 )

Wowee, some of our posters really don't like it that society has decided, based on science, that they are not allowed to sleep with minors.

-4 ( +17 / -21 )

@Alongfortheride

It takes 2 to tango.

I hope you try making that argument to the father of a daughter sometime, after he's been drinking. I also hope he lifts weights.

-11 ( +9 / -20 )

Startling!

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Strangerland -

Wowee, some of our posters really don't like it that society has decided, based on science, that they are not allowed to sleep with minors.

When these crimes are reported, there is always a disturbing number of sick men who believe children are equally guilty in these cases. No matter their age. God knows whats going through some of their perverted minds.

-9 ( +13 / -22 )

Anyone who has a daughter should always be on lookout for rock spiders and Japan has plenty of them…..

6 ( +12 / -6 )

What kind of monster would do this to n innocent child? Children need to be protected from these fiends.

-13 ( +6 / -19 )

Fighto! Today 09:27 am JST

Strangerland -

Wowee, some of our posters really don't like it that society has decided, based on science, that they are not allowed to sleep with minors.

When these crimes are reported, there is always a disturbing number of sick men who believe children are equally guilty in these cases. No matter their age. God knows whats going through some of their perverted minds.

Strangerland and I don't agree on much, but I admire him for his stance on this issue.

This site is dangerously toxic when it comes to the issue of underage prostitution and older men, with many refusing to put the blame on the grown men who seek out young girls for sex. It's disgusting.

Even falseflagsteve agrees, and holy cow, when do he and I ever see eye to eye.

Glad to see so many standing up on this issue.

1 ( +15 / -14 )

Wowee, some of our posters really don't like it that society has decided, based on science, that they are not allowed to sleep with minors.

Science played no role in this.

The first age of consent law dates back to the 1200s, and it was about keeping girls "marriageable". Ages went up to generally 12 years old in Victorian times starting with a yellow journalism scare of English girls being prostituted in Belgium, which was probably less true than English girls being prostituted in England. In Canada the age of consent was recently raised just because an American guy hooked up with a gay teen and there was a collective freakout about it among parents of teen boys. France did not seem to even have an age of consent law until some idiot firefighters decided to gang rape a young teen, and I am not talking about regret sex here but an actual forcible rape.

These things have nothing to do with science at all. Actually being scientific about this would net quite different results.

This particular girl might manage to get another guy in trouble before she finally comes of age. Its quite likely she has already mastered the science of making money off of sex deemed illegal by decree from up on high.

1 ( +12 / -11 )

Is 19 still considered a "minor" in Japan?

1 ( +6 / -5 )

Usually it is a police sting. Either way, a criminal or a criminal detective. You don't want either one in your life.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Roy,

the use of "minor", for this incident 14 or 19 is a big difference.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

What have you got against older men?

I would say it's the

underage prostitution

that makes men like Jimmy Saville.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Not spinning anything, just saying 14 and 19 are different.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

Japan has raised the age of consent to sixteen BUT it has a separate law which states that anyone over 20 involved with some under if the age gap is more than five years is committing an abuse of power crime. The person above was in his 30's so no matter how you look at it he is seen (legally) as using his power (age and money) to persuade the victim to consent to his actions.

People may not agree with these laws but they are still the law. If you believe someone who is maybe 18 or 19 might be able to make a decision on their own many people may agree with you. But, they still should have been able to make the decision to wait the year or two for them have their fun legally.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

> girl_in_tokyoToday 10:41 am JST

Fighto! Today 09:27 am JST

> Strangerland -

> Wowee, some of our posters really don't like it that society has decided, based on science, that they are not allowed to sleep with minors.

> When these crimes are reported, there is always a disturbing number of sick men who believe children are equally guilty in these cases. No matter their age. God knows whats going through some of their perverted minds.

> Strangerland and I don't agree on much, but I admire him for his stance on this issue.

> This site is dangerously toxic when it comes to the issue of underage prostitution and older men, with many refusing to put the blame on the grown men who seek out young girls for sex. It's disgusting.

> Even falseflagsteve agrees, and holy cow, when do he and I ever see eye to eye.

> Glad to see so many standing up on this issue.

So, to you there's no problem with underage prostitution? That's more toxic and disgusting than anything but we all know the girl or woman is always innocent with you.

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

What results are you implying it would net?

At the very least, case by case judgements where the actual sentiments of the younger party are considered. What does this girl think and want? Hell, now they don't even give us an age!

What we have going on here amounts to an elementary school exercise where if his age minus her age is greater than 5, and the younger party is below either 18 or 16, then its all put on the same level of a Satanic baby sarcrifice. 4 years? Oh, that's okay I guess! This isn't scientific! Its utter insanity!

I cannot even remember the last time I read an article and there was a SINGLE WORD from the younger party. The "moral righteousness" folks never even ask about that. And its because they don't give a single damn for the younger party! Its all about having some man to pillory. Even when they go after older women like Brigitte Trogneux (wife of Emmanuel Macron) its about maintaining a norm where they get to pillory some men regularly cause its usually men isn't it?

I could go on. But science would encourage more openness and sex positivity for the sake of the mental health of EVERYONE, including teens. It would account for the young men and women who develop faster in all ways than their peers instead of lump them all into one stupidly neutered club. Sex education would NOT be based on promotion of fear of sex. And much more. But sex is the one place the techno countries definitely do NOT want science. They prefer to have glyphosate in their breakfast cereals cause they love science but deep down they HATE sex.

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

girl_in_tokyoToday 10:41 am JST

This site is dangerously toxic when it comes to the issue of underage prostitution and older men, with many refusing to put the blame on the grown men who seek out young girls for sex. It's disgusting.

It's about blaming SOLELY men, while remaining silent of the fact that many women, unfortunately including minor girls find it pretty normal to agree to sex in return of money.

Parents should strongly teach their underage daughters to reject such requests of sexual services from men in return of cash.

AlongfortherideToday 07:16 am JST

It takes 2 to tango.

In this case it is reasonable to say this.

This girl, using social media, agreed to meet this man in a love hotel for two hours. Nobody forced her to do so, she knew exactly what she did. She took the money, never complained about this man and her parents found out only accidentally what their daughter did.

It might be good for police investigators not only to arrest this man, but also questioning this girl if she is doing this the first time or if this man is only one out of her customers.

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

Science played no role in this.

Yes it does, your are confusing between deciding that maturity is required to consent for sexual activity and defining precisely when this threshold is located for legal purposes. It is simple to demonstrate minors have a reduced capacity to make decisions and that there are many reproductive health related risks that they are not qualified to address properly in general.

At the very least, case by case judgements where the actual sentiments of the younger party are considered. What does this girl think and want? 

As long as the law is clear that is irrelevant. An adult made the decision to break the law to have sexual intercourse with an underage girl and pay for it. Whatever the girl sentiments are will not dispense the crime.

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

It is simple to demonstrate minors have a reduced capacity to make decisions and that there are many reproductive health related risks that they are not qualified to address properly in general.

For someone who claims to be a scientist, you thinking is horrifically unscientific. For starters, the term "minor" is a legal term not used in science for the obvious reason that every country has a different definition.

Next up, qualifications are not a matter of age but rather a matter of knowledge and experience.

And you say this is simple? Oh HELL no! No person with a scientific brain would declare that any of this is simple! Its anything but simple! The studies about teen decision making ability are riddled with controversy, and that is due to the rather obvious bias that adults have regarding decision making and risk!

As long as the law is clear that is irrelevant. An adult made the decision to break the law to have sexual intercourse with an underage girl and pay for it. Whatever the girl sentiments are will not dispense the crime.

So you advocate punishmen for what may well be a victimless "crime". And you do this on the basis of "Well, its the law!" Something tells me you won't err on the side of "Its the law" when its homosexuals given the death penalty in Iran for gay activity. Oh no! I bet then suddenly the sentiments of both parties start to matter to you!

Yes the law is clear. The law is also an ass.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

For someone who claims to be a scientist, you thinking is horrifically unscientific.

Who has claimed to be a scientist? making up imaginary things so you can attack other people instead of actually addressing the arguments is a sure sign you understand you can't actually defend your position.

For starters, the term "minor" is a legal term not used in science for the obvious reason that every country has a different definition.

Using scientific arguments to define legal terms is something perfectly appropiate, in this case the whole point is that a legal determination has been done to consider some people minors and that actually has scientific basis, even if you want to ignore that very much because it spoils your position.

Next up, qualifications are not a matter of age but rather a matter of knowledge and experience.

But since knowledge and experience are correlated with age very clearly it is valid and understandable that age is used as a practical surrogate that simplifies the situation enough to be actually useful for a legal framework.

And you say this is simple? 

Compared with the alternative (continuous, repeated evaluation of every single individual to decide when they become able to give consent) definitely is. That is the whole point of using surrogates.

So you advocate punishmen for what may well be a victimless "crime". 

It is not a victimless crime, because the minors are not legally capable of giving consent, your point would be like not doing anything after a scammer takes everything from a senile patient as long as the victim feels happy about it.

Something tells me you won't err on the side of "Its the law" when its homosexuals given the death penalty in Iran for gay activity. 

The huge difference that if everybody involved can actually give consent then there is no crime and no victim, which completely destroys your invalid comparison.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

Who has claimed to be a scientist?

It may well be that you didn't. But its painfully obvious you are avoiding mentioning what you did claim about your profession so as to avoid the fact that your thinking is anything but from a scientific standpoint.

Even someone well versed in virology would not make the blunders you are with this subject.

and that actually has scientific basis,

Something you claim without much specifics. I can assure you that there is this general belief that lawmakers delve deep into science when they foist these laws on us. Well, they damn well don't. They cherry pick some science to excuse the crap they made up AT BEST. And that is why you will never EVER be able to point a specific age of consent law based on specific science.....because....it never happened. It was ALWAYS some emotional plea or careerism at work.

But since knowledge and experience are correlated with age very clearly

If this were true Riley Speidel would not have been allowed to fly solo across the U.S. Alexander the Great would have lost his first battle at age 16 and he certainly would not have been left in charge of the kingdom by his father. And the 15 year old girl in my town who got emancipated would not have been allowed. You are just working with a clearly biased data set.

Compared with the alternative (continuous, repeated evaluation of every single individual to decide when they become able to give consent) definitely is. That is the whole point of using surrogates.

That is not remotely connect to what I said was not simple. You get more irrational by the second.

Further, I reject your idea of favoring convenience over justice. That is a completely sick idea, especially when its meddling in people's sex lives.

It is not a victimless crime, because the minors are not legally capable of giving consent

What??? A person is a victim because the law says they are??? NOT because they say they are? NOT because a psychiaitrist has diagnosed trauma? But simply because some law written before they were even born says they are?

Dude. You are off the friggen rails! Legal ability to consent and psychological ability to consent are two completely and utterly different things!

And that is why my comparison is totally valid!

If it were not, then jailing two 14 year olds for having sex would be a commonplace thing, as by your standard, they raped eachother!

You might be rational on other topics, but on this one, you have thrown all logic straight into a burning inferno!

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

@ Keepyer Internetpoints

I'm not too sure how much credibility you have in relation to laws of consent. Previously, you have defended a man who molested an elementary schoolgirl :

You are speaking as if he ran outside and dragged her off the street. That isn't what happened.

There is not one word that the girl was forced, brutalized, threatened, held down, or even unwilling.

An ELEMENTARY school girl in that case. 

Enough said.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

Enough said.

A witch hunter phrase.

Previously, you have defended a man who molested an elementary schoolgirl :

That is the type of characterization witch hunters make.

Pointing out that treating a non-kidnapper the same as a kidnapper is a mistake is not "defending a man". Its defending justice and logic, two things witch hunters detest.

Witch hunters don't even want to bother to assess a girl's level of trauma so as to assess a fair sentence, much less guage some level of pity for the girl. I will say it again.....witch hunters don't give a single damn about the welfare of the girls. They just want to pillory some men and this is all but a handy excuse.

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

It may well be that you didn't

Good that you can recognize you made up this claim, next still remains the issue that addressing the actual arguments instead of the people that repeat them is much more productive.

Even someone well versed in virology would not make the blunders you are with this subject.

It was very easy to rebuke faulty arguments and misrepresentations you tried to use, those are not blunders.

Something you claim without much specifics

It would be insulting to pretend you ignore this very simple fact, but if you can accept you are not even aware that children are not able to make as good decisions as adults then you are already conceding the point by admitting complete ignorance. So it is now your argument that you don't know that the ability to give consent is not something people are born with?

Well, they damn well don't.

You need then to prove the claim you are making, specifically by demonstrating that the scientific basis for considering children not able to consent is false and it was decided completely arbitrarily without any scientific data to support it.

If this were true Riley Speidel would not have been allowed to fly solo across the U.S. Alexander the Great

So if something do not apply absolutely to 100% of the cases then it must mean it does not apply ever? that is a simple fallacy, correlation can exist even with exceptions, pretending this is not the case would be a much closer example of blunders.

That is not remotely connect to what I said was not simple

You argued using a quote from my comment, which is still about the same thing. It obviously do not connect with the irrelevant thing you pretended I said was simple, but what was actually qualified this way.

Further, I reject your idea of favoring convenience over justice

Well since that is an idea only you came up with you are just rejecting yourself, the whole point is that simplicity is the only realistic way to have any justice instead of suggesting impossible alternatives or just assuming every children is an adult capable of consenting.

What??? A person is a victim because the law says they are??? 

Again not the law as you repeatedly try to misrepresent but because reality is that children are not able to consent even if you want to believe they can. The law is only a reflection of this that you simply want to discard without ever demonstrate is false.

And that is why my comparison is totally valid!

It is still not because there is no basis to say adults can't consent, you just claim is the same situation when in reality science clearly supports the basic difference.

If it were not, then jailing two 14 year olds for having sex would be a commonplace thing, as by your standard, they raped eachother!

No, that is your position, because to jail both you need them to be treated as adults, without the ability to consent both are victims not criminals. You are doing a very good job proving yourself wrong.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

How old was she?

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Making sex something to fear or to dare is not helping demography or people's life

Science is indeed totally forgotten.

But it is the law.

One just need to say he did not know the age LOL.

Don't ask and all is fine, what an utter nonsense.

I have two daughters. If that happened, I guarantee I would be hurt by my daughter's behavior, not by a man who likes sex with young nubile woman who wishes so.

Of course, we are not talking about absence of full consent.

To demonstrate the point : what would you do as a parent if the girl continue that because she likes it and lies about her age ?

Do you imprison her at home ?

No, you educate her.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

Absolutely astonishes me that there are some commenting here condoning paedophile activities. Wish the police could have a look at their laptops. They'd be safely locked away for a while, you see

-5 ( +7 / -12 )

You need then to prove the claim you are making

Are you for real?

I cannot prove a negative. How illogical of you to suggest I could.

AND the original claim that science was used to make these laws was NOT my claim. It was Strangerland's and you decided to jump in and own it.

I can provide an example of how this usually goes though. A careerist lawmaker in Florida got this woman named Sherry Johnson to testify about her marriage at 11 years old. It worked and the age of marriage was raised to 17.

The unscientific part? Well, I doubt any science was ever cited. But they had no happily married 16 year olds testify, just this one now late middle-aged woman. Further, the law would not have even helped her at all. She was being raped by both her step dad at home and her deacon. Without the marriage that would have continued. With the marriage, it was now only the deacon, her husband. So she preferred being raped by two men over one? Also, no mention of the possible fate of her children, all of whom she kept in part, thanks to the marriage. This woman resents her kids?

I now leave it you and Strangerland to evidence an age of consent law based primarily on science and also evidence that science. Or you could just give up now and admit its an impossible task since we all know that is simply not how legislators work.

None of this has anything to do with science except remotely some cherry picked science. Just admit it. Its not that hard.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

JoffreyToday 01:51 pm JST

In One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest McMurphy said, "She was fifteen years old, going on thirty-five, Doc, and she told me she was eighteen, she was very willing, I practically had to take to sewing my pants shut." But that was 1975. Still funny though.

Hahahaha, yeah, statutory rape of minors is hilarious!

It's interesting to say the least that people see fictional movies about crazy people as justification for rape.

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

Wrong. The logic centres of the brain don’t fully form until 25, making minors ripe for coercion by adults who do have fully formed logic centres.

So the age of consent is 25 in most places?

No. You are obviously wrong. No legislator cited any science about brain development being complete at 25 to then advocate an age of consent of 16! That is probably the most insane suggestion I have ever read on this board. Of course I am not surprised though, because any time such a subject comes up, insanity is par for the course.

Hell, you did not even mention the legislature that supposedly did this, or the legistator the put forth the bill. You are so far out of your element you may was be on Pluto. You are guessing. Worse, you cannot even get simple numbers straight!

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

When in doubt, make her show you ID. Don’t want to do that? Enjoy jail.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

So the age of consent is 25 in most places?

No, it’s been decided at various ages by different societies. It needs to be made some age, I’m on with Japan’s chosen mark.

No. You are obviously wrong. No legislator cited any science about brain development being complete at 25 to then advocate an age of consent of 16! 

When the laws were made the science behind the brain wasn’t known, but observations by society showed that minors aren’t old enough to make that decision. The science supported it later on. Very common with science.

Anyways you guys can express outrage all you want. Society doesn’t care about your outrage nearly as much as it cares about protecting children from predatory adults.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

Are you for real?

That is the minimum necessary for anybody. You are making a claim impossible to believe, the least you can do is to prove the professional in education and child rearing are all wrong and the ability to make proper decisions is not correlated to age (which is what you claim).

I cannot prove a negative. How illogical of you to suggest I could.

Of course you can, scientist every day prove things are not correlated, if what you claim was true you would be able to offer evidence that children can make good decisions from birth without any improvement with age.

AND the original claim that science was used to make these laws was NOT my claim

Which is why I am not asking you to prove what is already well described, I am asking you to prove what YOU claimed,

When I said knowledge and experience are correlated with age very clearly

You said If this were true Riley Speidel would not have been allowed to fly solo across the U.S...

So you are saying this (correlation of knowledge and experience with age) is not true, without offering any evidence of it.

You are making claims that science is not involved, and that the correlation is not true, by accepting you can't prove any of those claims you are also accepting your point is baseless and much more likely to be incorrect.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

virusrexToday 12:48 pm JST

It is not a victimless crime, because the minors are not legally capable of giving consent, your point would be like not doing anything after a scammer takes everything from a senile patient as long as the victim feels happy about it.

What a strange argument is this? Do you really compare an underage age girl who is demanding money in return of sex from older men with a senile patient who lost money because of a scammer and consider both of them as a 'victim'?

I see a big difference between an underage girl who has sex with a boyfriend around her age she knows and likes him for free or an underage girl who offers sexual favors to a much older unknown man explicitly only in return of money.

To consider this girl as a 'victim' is a bit over the top. Nobody forced her joining the sex business, she signed up for it on social media herself.

About this man who was arrested, I consider him as an idiot. There is no shortage of easy-going women 20+ in all Japan who offer sexual favors against some cash.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

YohanToday 12:10 pm JST

It's about blaming SOLELY men, while remaining silent of the fact that many women, unfortunately including minor girls find it pretty normal to agree to sex in return of money.

Minors cannot consent to sex. So yes, the blame is on the adult - whether male or female, whichever the case may be. I am fully aware that there are women who molest children, too.

Parents should strongly teach their underage daughters to reject such requests of sexual services from men in return of cash.

Do you honestly think parents do not teach their children not to have sex for money?

This girl, using social media, agreed to meet this man in a love hotel for two hours. Nobody forced her to do so, she knew exactly what she did. She took the money, never complained about this man and her parents found out only accidentally what their daughter did.

Again: minors cannot consent to sex with adults. This is a simple concept.

0 ( +8 / -8 )

To consider this girl as a 'victim' is a bit over the top. Nobody forced her joining the sex business, she signed up for it on social media herself.

As a minor, without fully developed logic centres in her brain, and without the requisite life experience, she cannot understand the full impact of her actions. Unlike adults who can. So again, this is 100% on the adult. We expect adults to be the adult in the room and not statutory rape our children.

0 ( +7 / -7 )

Anyone who blames the minor in this scenario whilst absolving or downplaying the adult is tacitly approving of rape. And anyone tacitly approving of rape is a potential rapist.

Chew on that.

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

When the laws were made the science behind the brain wasn’t known,

Finally. Something resembling the truth. Almost smelling like an apology for being incorrect.

but observations by society showed that minors aren’t old enough to make that decision. The science supported it later on.

Holy back pedal, Batman!

The "science" is hardly complete or accepted even in parts even now. We do not understand the brain well.

Besides which, this is not math or science. This is something cats and dogs do in the backyard, minus cash payment.

We almost only ever hear the "bad" stories. We NEVER hear the 1000+ positive stories we all know are out there. That is one HELL of a data bias. People like you want to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

The funny thing is, I don't like teen prostitution either. But trying to end it by stomping it out through ever higher ages of consent, police stings, and outrageous jail sentences is stupid and damaging to both teens and society.

But you don't care. You got a witch to burn. Oh happy day!

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

What a strange argument is this? Do you really compare an underage age girl who is demanding money in return of sex from older men with a senile patient who lost money because of a scammer and consider both of them as a 'victim'?

Yes because the common point is still the same, the person can be proved not to be able to legally give consent for neither thing based on scientific data that clearly indicates some people can understand the decisions they are making properly and other people can't. Can you argue against this point? because if not that is still a valid comparison.

You

Again making false claims about other people? you already claimed this and when asked where I supposedly said this you ended up recognizing it was false, why make the same false claim again?

No it's not. Lol! Where'd you come up with that?

It should be obvious, make illegal things that have been proved to have a negative effect on the health, make legal activities that have demonstrated to be innocuous or even beneficial, how else do you think laws should be decided? randomly?

You committed the simple fallacy here--the red herring.

That is not what the red herring fallacy means, there is no irrelevant piece of information distracting from the point, instead is an argument that helps understanding why the false dichotomy is not only wrong but even deeply irrational, pretending something must apply always and in every circumstance or else it does not apply to any is the real fallacy.

Finally. Something resembling the truth. Almost smelling like an apology for being incorrect

That is of course irrelevant, your claim is that saying dge and experience are correlated with age is false, but you still have not brought any evidence that refutes this well known fact. It is not relevant when the scientific basis for a determination can be found, as long as the basis is there the determination keeps being valid.

The "science" is hardly complete or accepted even in parts even now. We do not understand the brain well.

Irrelevant, if something is supported by the best available science then the only valid option is to recognize it as true, saying that maybe in the future this will be corrected has no importance, either you can correct it with scientific evidence now or you accept it has to be considered correct.

This is something cats and dogs do in the backyard

No, it is not, consent is something exclusive to humans.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

The girl, a teenager (12-18) is the victim like all the girls in these situations. She needs counsel and therapy to understand what she did was wrong but also dangerous. She does not need punishment.

0 ( +7 / -7 )

Finally. Something resembling the truth. Almost smelling like an apology for being incorrect.

Sure, I should have said:

Wowee, some of our posters really don't like it that society has decided, supported by science, that they are not allowed to sleep with minors.

Holy back pedal, Batman!

Not at all. People observed minors aren't able to make logical decisions, and later science supported that observation.

Besides which, this is not math or science.

Yes it is - the logic centers of the brain are not formed until 25. And now that we know the science supports that, it reinforces the correctness of the laws that have been set.

We almost only ever hear the "bad" stories. We NEVER hear the 1000+ positive stories we all know are out there.

Society isn't willing to sacrifice our children because some people somehow think that sleeping with minors sometimes doesn't turn out bad.

The funny thing is, I don't like teen prostitution either. But trying to end it by stomping it out through ever higher ages of consent, police stings, and outrageous jail sentences is stupid and damaging to both teens and society.

No it's not. It's what society wants. Boo hoo to those that want to statutory rape children. None of the adults in the room care about them, or will shed a single tear for them in jail.

But you don't care. You got a witch to burn.

Nope, just statutory rapists. Witches aren't real. Statutory rapists are.

Sorry, was I not supposed to point out your use of silly rhetoric? My bad.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

The girl, a teenager (12-18) is the victim like all the girls in these situations.

Bingo. It's why society requires the adults in the room to be the adults in the room.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

It's not false.

Prove it otherwise.

Easy you keep claiming this and never bring any quote where I said so,

Making false accusations about what other people are or do is against the rules of the site,

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Figured this is what you'd go for lol the people that put this much thought and research into age of consent laws always come up with the strangest logic to doing so.

Yeah, I take a lot of flak for looking into this deeply. Sort of odd. I could become a famous historian on WW2 and spend my time going through old records and dusty books. WW2 ended about 80 years ago. But people have indicated to me that cracking down on any sort of teen sex is vitaly important to today, so I looked into it. And all the information I collected and examined led me to a different conclusion than those who just react using their guts for guidance, and lo and behold I am some kind of freak for being scientific and logical about it. And as you have indicated I am not alone, but this is rather standard.

And I expound on this because the utter ignorance and illogical being bandied about frustrates me to no end.

I have to deny using "strange logic" though. The only strange thing there is that I appy logic where its not popular to do so.

And to the dudes saying that it's hypocritical how this backlash doesn't happen when women are the predators, you can thank the fact that we live in a patriarchal society for that.

Inside out, upside-down and backwards. Women are a protected class, and that has as much to do with the patriarchy as the matriachy.

But the patriachy is not really interested in curbing prostitution. They only agree to it because of pressure from the matriachy (their wives and mothers). The common woman does not want the minority of women who would prostitute to devalue them or sever their sexual hold on men.

Further, the matriarchy does not want teen girls setting the value of the female body, because in their view, they won't demand enough from men. The goal of the matriarchy is to enslave men and get the full value of their labor and a chain on their ankle, not achieve a fair exchange of money and service and carry on.

Go to a more predominantly patriarchal society and the teen girls are married off with money going one way or the other. Meanwhile prostitutes are treated as trash, not taken to clean, safe love hotels after a restaurant dinner.

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

Readers, some of you are veering off topic. Please discuss the story.

Did he hunt this girl down, groom her and persuade her against her will to come to a love hotel with him? Did she, in complete innocence not know what a love hotel was?

Or was she trying to catch a guy like this and make some money off of him?

The article doesn't supply this information. Without exact details, it just becomes a big generality.

-6 ( +5 / -11 )

Thanks ghosh we have laws against this stuff as it seems some men don't think it is wrong.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

Did he hunt this girl down, groom her and persuade her against her will to come to a love hotel with him? Did she, in complete innocence not know what a love hotel was?

Or was she trying to catch a guy like this and make some money off of him?

The article doesn't supply this information. Without exact details, it just becomes a big generality.

None of it is relevant, as she is a minor, without fully developed logic centers, nor the life experience, to be able to comprehend the full consequences of her actions. Therefore, society has not given her the permission to consent, and any adult who slept with her is entirely in the wrong. It's why this man is in jail, and no one really cares, other than a few internet posters who don't like it that they aren't allowed to coerce minors.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

girl_in_tokyo

Today 03:50 pm JST

Do you honestly think parents do not teach their children not to have sex for money?

Yes, in case of daughters, I think so. Just my experience so far. Educational deficit.

Tell me, from where did this girl in question get the idea to meet older men and offering sex in return of money on social media?

Of course, such families are often broken, there is only the single/divorced mother around who does not care or the daughter is doing anyway whatever she wants.

I said already, this man was an idiot to pay this underage girl for sex. He should look for any woman 20+ for sexual services. Not really the best solution anyway, but he would be surely, legally seen, in a better position than he is now.

Best way to go is of course don't pay women for sex, but use your money for something else.

However this is easier said than done. The dating scene is totally broken and many men prefer just to pay women for a few happy hours - and not only in Japan.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

said already, this man was an idiot to pay this underage girl for sex. He should look for any woman 20+ for sexual services. Not really the best solution anyway, but he would be surely, legally seen, in a better position than he is now.

Legally and morally. And he’s not just an idiot, he’s a criminal.

4 ( +8 / -4 )

YohanToday 05:19 pm JST

Of course, such families are often broken, there is only the single/divorced mother around who does not care or the daughter is doing anyway whatever she wants.

It's possible. But we have no idea if that is the case here or not. There are a myriad of reasons it could happen.

I said already, this man was an idiot to pay this underage girl for sex. He should look for any woman 20+ for sexual services. Not really the best solution anyway, but he would be surely, legally seen, in a better position than he is now.

Not "an idiot" - a sex offender and a pervert.

However this is easier said than done. The dating scene is totally broken and many men prefer just to pay women for a few happy hours - and not only in Japan.

That is their business, so what do I care what others do?

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

It takes two to tango.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

Coerce minors??? Not a single person said anything about coercing minors. The article says nothing about a minor being coerced.

Yes it does. The guy had sex with a minor. As minors do not have the legal capacity to consent, there is only one way to do that, and it's either straight-up sexual assault of a minor, or in this case, coercion.

I know this really bothers you, but none of us have a problem with that.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

No excuses, this accountant is an alleged sex offender, procuring a minor/child for the purposes of prostitution,

A nonce.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites