Many do not understand the true meaning of statutory rape. There are so many factors that come into play in the law that it would take a book to cover them all. The legal definition of statutory rape is “sexual intercourse between an adult and a person under the legal age of 12” (Hill). The law was first written to say that only a woman could be a victim of statutory rape, but was later revised so that either gender could be a victim. But when you really think about it, is this a true statement? Can both a man and a woman be victims of statutory rape? Can both a man and a woman be guilty of this crime? According to some people, only a woman can be raped. Many of them also repeat the classic phrase that everyone always says: "If he has an erection, then he must have wanted it, so it wouldn't be rape." » Well, would that be true for a five-year-old boy who was sexually abused? Someone who doesn't understand why or how this happens to their body? Most people also don't understand that to be convicted of rape, the victim does not need to give consent or not. Only for one simple reason: when the person is so young, that is, under 12, they cannot legally give consent. Whether “yes” or “no” was a contributing factor to the sexual act, they still had sex with someone under the age of 12, so it is illegal. Why does consent make a difference? For a simple reason that most people wouldn't think of, it's because of the story behind it all. Rape laws were once divided not only by gender, but also by race. Black women were not protected by rape laws because they were seen as commodities and not people (Ultius). Many ... middle of paper ......man, have been accused of rape in California and now claim that state law unconstitutionally discriminates against men only. But one detail some people don't know about the federal law is that a state can provide penalties only for men to equalize the barriers to teen pregnancy. He claims that at the time of the crime, he was 17 years old and that he had sexual relations with a 16-year-old woman. And because California law only criminalizes men for this behavior, and the woman was not charged with any crime, even though she was just as guilty as him. Michael M now alleges that this disparity in rape laws constitutes a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (Michael M v. Sonoma County Superior Court).The lawsuit