In the 1988 film Big, the character Susan takes part in child grooming, when she pursues a relationship with Josh.
In the 1988 film Big, the character Susan takes part in child grooming, when she pursues a relationship with Josh.
It's also implied that she engages in statutory rape.
She's unaware of Josh's real age though, so I don't know the legal or moral implications.
Moral implications don't exist for her. She saw a fully adult male.
Legal implications don't exist, because no law on the books takes into account the concept of a child inhabiting an adults body.
Josh on the other hand......
Josh is a child and bears no responsibility for any sexual encounters
Solid assessment.
I think the closest legal grounds we have would be when an adult that has the mental capacity of a child is the victim. Of course this isn't the same scenario, and all tangible evidence is lost when Josh returned to his normal body.
At least he appears to be a grown ass man, unlike the Disney film Blank Check.
immediately what I thought of when I read this post. Even when I was 10 I was like "this is weird..."
The worst double standard we have as a society is that only girls are victims of weird stuff like this.
Jfc. Gross.
Eesh.
What the hell am I watching
She was a fed too wasn't she?
Ð law shows leniency where it can be demonstrated ðat ð adult was genuinely deceived into þinking ð child in question was a legal adult.
Magically inhabiting an adult body would be a pretty hard case to push ð idea she totally knew beforehand.
Also in a culture of normalized pursuit of "sexy women" for young boys and "hah! Lucky!" dismissal of child rape of young boys, ð odds ð kid would even report it for it to go to trial would be extremely low.