A 34-year-old Italian man seduces a 13-year-old girl in an automobile, beginning a 4-month sexual affair. He's finally caught and goes to court to receive his punishment.But, lo and behold, the judges turn out to be an enlightened bunch. They understand that the laws prohibiting sexual exploitation of minors were derived from sexual taboos too strict, too unyielding, too puritanical for the modern age. For instance, when the offender's lawyers argued that the sex was consensual, that there was "real love" and "deep tenderness" between the two, and that the initial sexual assault of the girl had caused the man to fall "head over heels in love," the judges bought it all. Instead of the 12 years imprisonment he was facing, the court gave him a year and four months.
But due to a general amnesty for anyone who receives a sentence of less than three years, the lout will probably not serve any prison time at all!
Antonio Marziale, the president of the Association for the Protection of the Rights of Minors, said the decision was "execrable." "It is not right to judge whether or not a 13-year-old girl is willing. The law should safeguard young girls who are too immature to make these decisions against adults without scruples."
However, Simonetta Matone, author and a judge at the Court of Minors in Rome, aping the rhetoric used by so many others to defend sexual deviancy, particularly the abuse of minors by adults, dismissed Marziale's old-fashioned views. She argues instead that the law must "always look to be reasonable in these cases" and added, "Every relationship is a relationship and the real maturity, whether physical or psychological, of the minor must be weighed, with the help of experts."
In an article Matone once wrote, "My Life for the Children of Pain," she bemoaned the crisis of "uncontrollable children" in Italy and suggested it was caused primarily by the loss of authority of the Italian male, itself a consequence of "the feminist revolution." The traditional father figure has disappeared, denying the culture his "sense of duty and dignity."
How then does Matone give any justification at all to the extreme violation of an adult male's "sense of duty and dignity" when it comes to the seduction and ongoing corruption of a 13-year old girl? Matone has that covered. As she puts it at the conclusion of her article, "perché accanto alla verità processuale c’è sempre un’altra verità." ("Because next to the truth, there is always another truth.")
This is, of course, a leap into the irrational, allowing for a dismissal of objective standards altogether, let alone the application of traditional morality through law. And in the place of such standards come new rules as decreed by Matone's "experts," the progressive thinkers who substitute their own brand of social science for the rule of law..."experts" who can give lip service to a man's "sense of duty and dignity" but then justify one of the most irresponsible, most undignified crimes of all.
