Should the father in this case have been charged with any crime?

[Beet]

He must be prosecuted on the basis of Platonic principles. Otherwise, the law is meaningless. However, the obvious consideration means that if convicted, he would not receive substantial punishment.

I do find it fascinating that over in the sex worker thread, TNF is saying we should stop putting sex on a weird pedestal, yet here he clearly recognizes that touching a child's sexual areas is a lot different than touching a child's other areas. So clearly, there is something different about it.

[Beet]

I do find it fascinating that over in the sex worker thread, TNF is saying we should stop putting sex on a weird pedestal, yet here he clearly recognizes that touching a child's sexual areas is a lot different than touching a child's other areas. So clearly, there is something different about it.

Saying that we shouldn't put sex on a pedestal =/= not being able to differentiate between consensual sex (which this wasn't) and rape (which it was, the victim said that he feared he would be hurt by the offender if he didn't comply with his sexual advances)

But why is rape considered more serious than nonconsensual touching of other body parts? The difference isn't consent, it's that one is sexual and the other isn't.