Man forces daughter to marry her rapist

[Fair&Balanced]

It's a CHILD. Children cannot consent to sex. They are children. Same reason why they can't drink, vote, etc., etc., etc. Because they make stupid decisions.

Again , the age at which they can consent differs among the states. I realize that you wish all states were the same, but they aren't.

Ages of consent in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is in fact a federal law that makes it an ADDITIONAL crime to transport a minor across state laws in order to have them participate in an illegal activity, but even the federal government interprets that to mean that if you live in a state where having sex with 16 year old is illegal and you drive a 16 year old girl to a state where it is legal, that isn't a cr16 ime.

BTW, the age of consent in Missouri is 17, not 14 so I now wonder about the validity of this entire story.

That is irrelevant to me! The laws need to be changed. These are CHILDREN. What in the world would make anyone think they are capable of making such a decision? Of course they are not grown up or fully matured yet! It is absolutely disgusting for a man in his 20s, 30s, 40s, etc., to take advantage of a child like that.

If the male in question was 16 it would be better for you?

Yes, then they are equals. A kid experimenting with another kid is completely different than a man getting his jollies with a teenager who he can EASILY manipulate. Are you defending this man's actions?

No, I'm not defending his actions.

I'm just confused by your assumption that if this girl was drunk and had sex and got pregnant with a 16 year old guy, that it would be better.


The 16 year old would have also "gotten his jollies" and the physical act is the same, the consequences are the same...


Either way the girl is now in the same situation. She was married, lost the baby, had the marriage annulled and is back to living at home and going to high school, (i assume).


The difference is in what happens with the male.

IN one scenario, nothing happens.

In the other he is doing 15 years.

IF the circumstances were the same, meaning 16 year old buy gets 16 year old girl drunk in order to have sex with her, the punishment would have been the same.

The close to age exemptions merely allow a minor to consent to a close to age person. They don't allow the other person to forcibly rape a close to age person, or to impair them in order to have sex or anything like that.

In fact, there have been multiple instances of stories where say 2 sixteen year olds go to a party, both get drunk , they have sex and the guy is charged with rape. Which I totally disagree with that, but that proves the point that the close to age exemptions have limits to what they allow.

 

[ChrisL]

It's a CHILD. Children cannot consent to sex. They are children. Same reason why they can't drink, vote, etc., etc., etc. Because they make stupid decisions.

Again , the age at which they can consent differs among the states. I realize that you wish all states were the same, but they aren't.

Ages of consent in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is in fact a federal law that makes it an ADDITIONAL crime to transport a minor across state laws in order to have them participate in an illegal activity, but even the federal government interprets that to mean that if you live in a state where having sex with 16 year old is illegal and you drive a 16 year old girl to a state where it is legal, that isn't a cr16 ime.

BTW, the age of consent in Missouri is 17, not 14 so I now wonder about the validity of this entire story.

That is irrelevant to me! The laws need to be changed. These are CHILDREN. What in the world would make anyone think they are capable of making such a decision? Of course they are not grown up or fully matured yet! It is absolutely disgusting for a man in his 20s, 30s, 40s, etc., to take advantage of a child like that.

If the male in question was 16 it would be better for you?

Yes, then they are equals. A kid experimenting with another kid is completely different than a man getting his jollies with a teenager who he can EASILY manipulate. Are you defending this man's actions?

No, I'm not defending his actions.

I'm just confused by your assumption that if this girl was drunk and had sex and got pregnant with a 16 year old guy, that it would be better.


The 16 year old would have also "gotten his jollies" and the physical act is the same, the consequences are the same...


Either way the girl is now in the same situation. She was married, lost the baby, had the marriage annulled and is back to living at home and going to high school, (i assume).


The difference is in what happens with the male.

IN one scenario, nothing happens.

In the other he is doing 15 years.

Sorry, I don't feel sorry for him at ALL. Don't mess with kids. If you do the crime, then expect to do the time!

 

[ChrisL]

Kids are not emotionally prepared for intimate "adult" relationships. That's why they like a new boy every week! They are immature and they are kids who are just starting out in life. If you are ever "tempted" by a child/teen, then you'd better move your sorry butt on down the line and forget about it. What the hell is a 20-something-year-old hanging out with 14 year olds for anyway? What a loser.

 

[Correll]

Again , the age at which they can consent differs among the states. I realize that you wish all states were the same, but they aren't.

Ages of consent in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is in fact a federal law that makes it an ADDITIONAL crime to transport a minor across state laws in order to have them participate in an illegal activity, but even the federal government interprets that to mean that if you live in a state where having sex with 16 year old is illegal and you drive a 16 year old girl to a state where it is legal, that isn't a cr16 ime.

BTW, the age of consent in Missouri is 17, not 14 so I now wonder about the validity of this entire story.

That is irrelevant to me! The laws need to be changed. These are CHILDREN. What in the world would make anyone think they are capable of making such a decision? Of course they are not grown up or fully matured yet! It is absolutely disgusting for a man in his 20s, 30s, 40s, etc., to take advantage of a child like that.

If the male in question was 16 it would be better for you?

Yes, then they are equals. A kid experimenting with another kid is completely different than a man getting his jollies with a teenager who he can EASILY manipulate. Are you defending this man's actions?

No, I'm not defending his actions.

I'm just confused by your assumption that if this girl was drunk and had sex and got pregnant with a 16 year old guy, that it would be better.


The 16 year old would have also "gotten his jollies" and the physical act is the same, the consequences are the same...


Either way the girl is now in the same situation. She was married, lost the baby, had the marriage annulled and is back to living at home and going to high school, (i assume).


The difference is in what happens with the male.

IN one scenario, nothing happens.

In the other he is doing 15 years.

I'm not saying that the scenario would be "good" either way, but it wouldn't be an adult taking advantage of a dumb girl. It would be a dumb boy and a dumb girl getting together. I was a 16 year old girl and I know what I'm talking about.

The traditional law against sex with minors was, as I understand it, to prevent older men from "taking advantage" of young girls and leaving them pregnant and.or "ruined".


Thus, the "Shotgun Wedding" in which the older man is forced to take responsibility and provide for his now family.



But NONE of that now applies.

Girls can get abortions. Girls aren't considered ruined if they are not virgins.

Hell, single motherhood is even acceptable now.


And the younger male, is just as likely (or not) to be predatory, and even more likely to impregnate the girl, with his higher fertility and sex drive.

 

[ChrisL]

That is irrelevant to me! The laws need to be changed. These are CHILDREN. What in the world would make anyone think they are capable of making such a decision? Of course they are not grown up or fully matured yet! It is absolutely disgusting for a man in his 20s, 30s, 40s, etc., to take advantage of a child like that.

If the male in question was 16 it would be better for you?

Yes, then they are equals. A kid experimenting with another kid is completely different than a man getting his jollies with a teenager who he can EASILY manipulate. Are you defending this man's actions?

No, I'm not defending his actions.

I'm just confused by your assumption that if this girl was drunk and had sex and got pregnant with a 16 year old guy, that it would be better.


The 16 year old would have also "gotten his jollies" and the physical act is the same, the consequences are the same...


Either way the girl is now in the same situation. She was married, lost the baby, had the marriage annulled and is back to living at home and going to high school, (i assume).


The difference is in what happens with the male.

IN one scenario, nothing happens.

In the other he is doing 15 years.

I'm not saying that the scenario would be "good" either way, but it wouldn't be an adult taking advantage of a dumb girl. It would be a dumb boy and a dumb girl getting together. I was a 16 year old girl and I know what I'm talking about.

The traditional law against sex with minors was, as I understand it, to prevent older men from "taking advantage" of young girls and leaving them pregnant and.or "ruined".


Thus, the "Shotgun Wedding" in which the older man is forced to take responsibility and provide for his now family.



But NONE of that now applies.

Girls can get abortions. Girls aren't considered ruined if they are not virgins.

Hell, single motherhood is even acceptable now.


And the younger male, is just as likely (or not) to be predatory, and even more likely to impregnate the girl, with his higher fertility and sex drive.

Shotgun weddings are not right. You don't FORCE people into marriages.

About younger males, maybe so, but they are still more equal experience wise (or SHOULD be) than a 20-something year old or older with a 14 year old!!! Good grief! They guy must be a complete loser.

 

[Correll]

Kids are not emotionally prepared for intimate "adult" relationships. That's why they like a new boy every week! They are immature and they are kids who are just starting out in life. If you are ever "tempted" by a child/teen, then you'd better move your sorry butt on down the line and forget about it. What the hell is a 20-something-year-old hanging out with 14 year olds for anyway? What a loser.

If kids are not prepared for intimate "Adult" relationships, then why the ever increasing acceptance of intimate "adult" relationships between "kids"?

 

[ChrisL]

I remember I went to a party a few years back (when I was in my 20s), and a group of young (VERY young) girls showed up. They started talking about school and gym class and such things! Lol. My boyfriend and I just looked at each other like "huh?" and we got out of there fast! I didn't want to have anything to do with a party where there were teenagers attending.

 

[ChrisL]

Kids are not emotionally prepared for intimate "adult" relationships. That's why they like a new boy every week! They are immature and they are kids who are just starting out in life. If you are ever "tempted" by a child/teen, then you'd better move your sorry butt on down the line and forget about it. What the hell is a 20-something-year-old hanging out with 14 year olds for anyway? What a loser.

If kids are not prepared for intimate "Adult" relationships, then why the ever increasing acceptance of intimate "adult" relationships between "kids"?

Because it is known that children are going to experiment with sex because of curiosity and because of exposure to more sexually explicit material than in the past.

 

[ChrisL]

That is irrelevant to me! The laws need to be changed. These are CHILDREN. What in the world would make anyone think they are capable of making such a decision? Of course they are not grown up or fully matured yet! It is absolutely disgusting for a man in his 20s, 30s, 40s, etc., to take advantage of a child like that.

If the male in question was 16 it would be better for you?

Yes, then they are equals. A kid experimenting with another kid is completely different than a man getting his jollies with a teenager who he can EASILY manipulate. Are you defending this man's actions?

No, I'm not defending his actions.

I'm just confused by your assumption that if this girl was drunk and had sex and got pregnant with a 16 year old guy, that it would be better.


The 16 year old would have also "gotten his jollies" and the physical act is the same, the consequences are the same...


Either way the girl is now in the same situation. She was married, lost the baby, had the marriage annulled and is back to living at home and going to high school, (i assume).


The difference is in what happens with the male.

IN one scenario, nothing happens.

In the other he is doing 15 years.

I'm not saying that the scenario would be "good" either way, but it wouldn't be an adult taking advantage of a dumb girl. It would be a dumb boy and a dumb girl getting together. I was a 16 year old girl and I know what I'm talking about.

The traditional law against sex with minors was, as I understand it, to prevent older men from "taking advantage" of young girls and leaving them pregnant and.or "ruined".


Thus, the "Shotgun Wedding" in which the older man is forced to take responsibility and provide for his now family.



But NONE of that now applies.

Girls can get abortions. Girls aren't considered ruined if they are not virgins.

Hell, single motherhood is even acceptable now.


And the younger male, is just as likely (or not) to be predatory, and even more likely to impregnate the girl, with his higher fertility and sex drive.

What century were YOU born in anyway? Lol.

 

[GaryDog]

I remember I went to a party a few years back (when I was in my 20s), and a group of young (VERY young) girls showed up. They started talking about school and gym class and such things! Lol. My boyfriend and I just looked at each other like "huh?" and we got out of there fast! I didn't want to have anything to do with a party where there were teenagers attending.

Yeah, there's no bigger buzz kill than thinking you're at a party with adults, and realizing you're actually an unwitting member of a conspiracy to corrupt children.

Same feeling I get at Red Robin all the time, lol. Can't they move the bar farther away from the birthday clapping??

 

[Correll]

If the male in question was 16 it would be better for you?

Yes, then they are equals. A kid experimenting with another kid is completely different than a man getting his jollies with a teenager who he can EASILY manipulate. Are you defending this man's actions?

No, I'm not defending his actions.

I'm just confused by your assumption that if this girl was drunk and had sex and got pregnant with a 16 year old guy, that it would be better.


The 16 year old would have also "gotten his jollies" and the physical act is the same, the consequences are the same...


Either way the girl is now in the same situation. She was married, lost the baby, had the marriage annulled and is back to living at home and going to high school, (i assume).


The difference is in what happens with the male.

IN one scenario, nothing happens.

In the other he is doing 15 years.

I'm not saying that the scenario would be "good" either way, but it wouldn't be an adult taking advantage of a dumb girl. It would be a dumb boy and a dumb girl getting together. I was a 16 year old girl and I know what I'm talking about.

The traditional law against sex with minors was, as I understand it, to prevent older men from "taking advantage" of young girls and leaving them pregnant and.or "ruined".


Thus, the "Shotgun Wedding" in which the older man is forced to take responsibility and provide for his now family.



But NONE of that now applies.

Girls can get abortions. Girls aren't considered ruined if they are not virgins.

Hell, single motherhood is even acceptable now.


And the younger male, is just as likely (or not) to be predatory, and even more likely to impregnate the girl, with his higher fertility and sex drive.

Shotgun weddings are not right. You don't FORCE people into marriages.

About younger males, maybe so, but they are still more equal experience wise (or SHOULD be) than a 20-something year old or older with a 14 year old!!! Good grief! They guy must be a complete loser.

IN the past, when the alternative to shotgun weddings was likely to be extreme poverty and prostitution, they certainly would have been "right".


BUT, today that is not the case.

Today, in the context where sex with other "children" is socially acceptable, what is the special downside to the girl's sex partner being older?

 

[GaryDog]

Believe it or not, parents often give permission for underaged daughters to get married. One of my oldest friends was married to his high school sweetheart when he was 15 and she was 16. She was pregnant. They were married, finished school, had a few more kids, were together until the kids were grown. Now they have different spouses, but they are still very close as are all their kids.

I guess you missed the part about the girl being FORCED to marry her RAPIST.

The forced part makes it not OK.

That was the terminology of the wacked out faggot copyeditor and the worthless author at that ridiculous homo site. You prove again that the baby killers have no concept of what "force" means. You'd be fine with "forcing" her to have an abortion, in reality...for her own good...but you can't stand the thought of her and her family facilitating a marriage. Sex is okay...abortion is okay...marriage is ABUSE.

MARRIAGE is a contract and a HUGE commitment supposedly for the rest of your life!

Only in a worst-case scenario ;-)

#DivorceIsBliss

 

[ChrisL]

Yes, then they are equals. A kid experimenting with another kid is completely different than a man getting his jollies with a teenager who he can EASILY manipulate. Are you defending this man's actions?

No, I'm not defending his actions.

I'm just confused by your assumption that if this girl was drunk and had sex and got pregnant with a 16 year old guy, that it would be better.


The 16 year old would have also "gotten his jollies" and the physical act is the same, the consequences are the same...


Either way the girl is now in the same situation. She was married, lost the baby, had the marriage annulled and is back to living at home and going to high school, (i assume).


The difference is in what happens with the male.

IN one scenario, nothing happens.

In the other he is doing 15 years.

I'm not saying that the scenario would be "good" either way, but it wouldn't be an adult taking advantage of a dumb girl. It would be a dumb boy and a dumb girl getting together. I was a 16 year old girl and I know what I'm talking about.

The traditional law against sex with minors was, as I understand it, to prevent older men from "taking advantage" of young girls and leaving them pregnant and.or "ruined".


Thus, the "Shotgun Wedding" in which the older man is forced to take responsibility and provide for his now family.



But NONE of that now applies.

Girls can get abortions. Girls aren't considered ruined if they are not virgins.

Hell, single motherhood is even acceptable now.


And the younger male, is just as likely (or not) to be predatory, and even more likely to impregnate the girl, with his higher fertility and sex drive.

Shotgun weddings are not right. You don't FORCE people into marriages.

About younger males, maybe so, but they are still more equal experience wise (or SHOULD be) than a 20-something year old or older with a 14 year old!!! Good grief! They guy must be a complete loser.

IN the past, when the alternative to shotgun weddings was likely to be extreme poverty and prostitution, they certainly would have been "right".


BUT, today that is not the case.

Today, in the context where sex with other "children" is socially acceptable, what is the special downside to the girl's sex partner being older?

I already explained this to you. Do you not know? Stay AWAY from kids. Got it?

 

[ChrisL]

If you are too much of a loser to get a woman your own age, then you are too much of a loser to be having sex! Go get yourself a blow up doll or something!

 

[Correll]

If the male in question was 16 it would be better for you?

Yes, then they are equals. A kid experimenting with another kid is completely different than a man getting his jollies with a teenager who he can EASILY manipulate. Are you defending this man's actions?

No, I'm not defending his actions.

I'm just confused by your assumption that if this girl was drunk and had sex and got pregnant with a 16 year old guy, that it would be better.


The 16 year old would have also "gotten his jollies" and the physical act is the same, the consequences are the same...


Either way the girl is now in the same situation. She was married, lost the baby, had the marriage annulled and is back to living at home and going to high school, (i assume).


The difference is in what happens with the male.

IN one scenario, nothing happens.

In the other he is doing 15 years.

I'm not saying that the scenario would be "good" either way, but it wouldn't be an adult taking advantage of a dumb girl. It would be a dumb boy and a dumb girl getting together. I was a 16 year old girl and I know what I'm talking about.

The traditional law against sex with minors was, as I understand it, to prevent older men from "taking advantage" of young girls and leaving them pregnant and.or "ruined".


Thus, the "Shotgun Wedding" in which the older man is forced to take responsibility and provide for his now family.



But NONE of that now applies.

Girls can get abortions. Girls aren't considered ruined if they are not virgins.

Hell, single motherhood is even acceptable now.


And the younger male, is just as likely (or not) to be predatory, and even more likely to impregnate the girl, with his higher fertility and sex drive.

What century were YOU born in anyway? Lol.

LOL!


Last century.

I'm not sure when I started to question modern taboos on this subject.

I remember being in high school and being aware of girls dating much older "men".

I also recall of lot of girls having sex with "boys" their own age, (not me, unfortunately)


I didn't see much difference in the effect on the girls in question.

 

[ChrisL]

Yes, then they are equals. A kid experimenting with another kid is completely different than a man getting his jollies with a teenager who he can EASILY manipulate. Are you defending this man's actions?

No, I'm not defending his actions.

I'm just confused by your assumption that if this girl was drunk and had sex and got pregnant with a 16 year old guy, that it would be better.


The 16 year old would have also "gotten his jollies" and the physical act is the same, the consequences are the same...


Either way the girl is now in the same situation. She was married, lost the baby, had the marriage annulled and is back to living at home and going to high school, (i assume).


The difference is in what happens with the male.

IN one scenario, nothing happens.

In the other he is doing 15 years.

I'm not saying that the scenario would be "good" either way, but it wouldn't be an adult taking advantage of a dumb girl. It would be a dumb boy and a dumb girl getting together. I was a 16 year old girl and I know what I'm talking about.

The traditional law against sex with minors was, as I understand it, to prevent older men from "taking advantage" of young girls and leaving them pregnant and.or "ruined".


Thus, the "Shotgun Wedding" in which the older man is forced to take responsibility and provide for his now family.



But NONE of that now applies.

Girls can get abortions. Girls aren't considered ruined if they are not virgins.

Hell, single motherhood is even acceptable now.


And the younger male, is just as likely (or not) to be predatory, and even more likely to impregnate the girl, with his higher fertility and sex drive.

What century were YOU born in anyway? Lol.

LOL!


Last century.

I'm not sure when I started to question modern taboos on this subject.

I remember being in high school and being aware of girls dating much older "men".

I also recall of lot of girls having sex with "boys" their own age, (not me, unfortunately)


I didn't see much difference in the effect on the girls in question.

It does have effects on the girls. The men are more experienced than the boys they are used to, and they are CHILDREN.

 

[Correll]

No, I'm not defending his actions.

I'm just confused by your assumption that if this girl was drunk and had sex and got pregnant with a 16 year old guy, that it would be better.


The 16 year old would have also "gotten his jollies" and the physical act is the same, the consequences are the same...


Either way the girl is now in the same situation. She was married, lost the baby, had the marriage annulled and is back to living at home and going to high school, (i assume).


The difference is in what happens with the male.

IN one scenario, nothing happens.

In the other he is doing 15 years.

I'm not saying that the scenario would be "good" either way, but it wouldn't be an adult taking advantage of a dumb girl. It would be a dumb boy and a dumb girl getting together. I was a 16 year old girl and I know what I'm talking about.

The traditional law against sex with minors was, as I understand it, to prevent older men from "taking advantage" of young girls and leaving them pregnant and.or "ruined".


Thus, the "Shotgun Wedding" in which the older man is forced to take responsibility and provide for his now family.



But NONE of that now applies.

Girls can get abortions. Girls aren't considered ruined if they are not virgins.

Hell, single motherhood is even acceptable now.


And the younger male, is just as likely (or not) to be predatory, and even more likely to impregnate the girl, with his higher fertility and sex drive.

Shotgun weddings are not right. You don't FORCE people into marriages.

About younger males, maybe so, but they are still more equal experience wise (or SHOULD be) than a 20-something year old or older with a 14 year old!!! Good grief! They guy must be a complete loser.

IN the past, when the alternative to shotgun weddings was likely to be extreme poverty and prostitution, they certainly would have been "right".


BUT, today that is not the case.

Today, in the context where sex with other "children" is socially acceptable, what is the special downside to the girl's sex partner being older?

I already explained this to you. Do you not know? Stay AWAY from kids. Got it?

NOt a problem for me, at this late date, happily married.

And really TOO OLD, for underage girls.

Hell, I'm invisible to women in the 20s, maybe in their 30s, at this point in time.


This is NOT a matter of personal significance.

It seems to me to be an anachronism of a time when women were seen as the weaker sex.


And I want to understand why it still survives.

 

[Correll]

No, I'm not defending his actions.

I'm just confused by your assumption that if this girl was drunk and had sex and got pregnant with a 16 year old guy, that it would be better.


The 16 year old would have also "gotten his jollies" and the physical act is the same, the consequences are the same...


Either way the girl is now in the same situation. She was married, lost the baby, had the marriage annulled and is back to living at home and going to high school, (i assume).


The difference is in what happens with the male.

IN one scenario, nothing happens.

In the other he is doing 15 years.

I'm not saying that the scenario would be "good" either way, but it wouldn't be an adult taking advantage of a dumb girl. It would be a dumb boy and a dumb girl getting together. I was a 16 year old girl and I know what I'm talking about.

The traditional law against sex with minors was, as I understand it, to prevent older men from "taking advantage" of young girls and leaving them pregnant and.or "ruined".


Thus, the "Shotgun Wedding" in which the older man is forced to take responsibility and provide for his now family.



But NONE of that now applies.

Girls can get abortions. Girls aren't considered ruined if they are not virgins.

Hell, single motherhood is even acceptable now.


And the younger male, is just as likely (or not) to be predatory, and even more likely to impregnate the girl, with his higher fertility and sex drive.

What century were YOU born in anyway? Lol.

LOL!


Last century.

I'm not sure when I started to question modern taboos on this subject.

I remember being in high school and being aware of girls dating much older "men".

I also recall of lot of girls having sex with "boys" their own age, (not me, unfortunately)


I didn't see much difference in the effect on the girls in question.

It does have effects on the girls. The men are more experienced than the boys they are used to, and they are CHILDREN.

How does that "Experience" translate to (increased?) harm to the girl?

 

[ChrisL]

Every guy I've ever known who was "interested" in teenagers was a dirtbag. No kidding.

 

[ChrisL]

I'm not saying that the scenario would be "good" either way, but it wouldn't be an adult taking advantage of a dumb girl. It would be a dumb boy and a dumb girl getting together. I was a 16 year old girl and I know what I'm talking about.

The traditional law against sex with minors was, as I understand it, to prevent older men from "taking advantage" of young girls and leaving them pregnant and.or "ruined".


Thus, the "Shotgun Wedding" in which the older man is forced to take responsibility and provide for his now family.



But NONE of that now applies.

Girls can get abortions. Girls aren't considered ruined if they are not virgins.

Hell, single motherhood is even acceptable now.


And the younger male, is just as likely (or not) to be predatory, and even more likely to impregnate the girl, with his higher fertility and sex drive.

What century were YOU born in anyway? Lol.

LOL!


Last century.

I'm not sure when I started to question modern taboos on this subject.

I remember being in high school and being aware of girls dating much older "men".

I also recall of lot of girls having sex with "boys" their own age, (not me, unfortunately)


I didn't see much difference in the effect on the girls in question.

It does have effects on the girls. The men are more experienced than the boys they are used to, and they are CHILDREN.

How does that "Experience" translate to (increased?) harm to the girl?

Why do these things have to be explained to you? Can't you use your brain and figure this out for yourself? It's not just about harming the girl. It's about punishing these men who prey on kids because they are much more easily coerced.