You seem to be having a problem with "proportionate response". — Bitter Crank

No. My problem is determining the right action to take.

It's a family matter, not the whole world's concern. Keep it within the family. — Bitter Crank

So, to clarify, you wouldn't tell your friend that your brother might try to have sex with his 16 year old daughter, given your brother's past history?

If you're arguing that 16-19 is an adult in any other sense than legal ability to consent in some jurisdictions... — tim wood

I am. I just listed to you only some of what someone aged sixteen or over is considered old enough to do. Obviously how mature any particular sixteen-year-old will be in terms of personality and so forth can and does vary, and the law doesn't account for this distinction. The law can't account for it, because it would be too impractical to implement. But nevertheless, the fact remains that there are some sixteen-year-olds which are sufficiently adult-like in various respects, one of them being the ability to consent to sex. That's the way it is, like it or lump it. Deal with it.

then I have to imagine — tim wood

No, you don't. How about you keep your wild imaginings to yourself? 'Kay, thanks.

If not isn't it somewhat condescending for you to assume that they don't have minds of their own or can make decisions for themselves. ' — Perplexed

Two of the girls complained to the police. But it's possible that the overwhelming majority of the girls had positive experiences with my brother. I doubt it, but I have no way of knowing for sure. I think if you asked, at least 90% of the mothers in the world who have 16 year old daughters would not want them having sex with my brother. That's not dispositive by itself, but it's important to consider why mothers feel that way. Combine that with a large power imbalance, the potential for manipulation and the fact that my brother doesn't have the best interests of the girls in mind.

Two of the girls complained to the police — Tree Falls

This is cause for concern. Are you in possession of any of the facts relating to the complaints?

BTW, how old are you? Straight or gay? Older or younger than your brother? Just wondering what your relationship with your brother is like, outside of this particular age of consent issue. — Bitter Crank

Age: mid-century. Straight. Older than my brother. We had a pretty close, but argumentative relationship before his arrests. Since then, hardly any relationship. I was initially not going to answer your questions, but they have prompted me to wonder whether my pursuing this is partly due to wanting to assert a hierarchical order over my brother. At the same time, I hadn't considered telling my friend before my significant other (who is a mother), said that we should tell him.

So I don't know how pure my motives are, which is why I want good, consistent reasons for acting. And that is why I am at this forum, so that my own biases are checked.

We had a pretty close, but argumentative relationship before his arrests. Since then, hardly any relationship. — Tree Falls

Did these arguments relate in any way to your brothers attitude and behaviour towards women?

Have you considered trying to rebuild the relationship so that you can be a positive influence to your brother?

Are you in possession of any of the facts relating to the complaints? — Perplexed

The first complaint was made by a girl who tried to blackmail my brother after they slept together. Whether the sleeping together included sex or not is up to dispute. The police seized his cell phone and saw other girls. They were contacted. My brother plead guilty to sexual relations with one of them, but says that he did so only so that he could get out of jail.

The second complaint, I have less information on. The details I do have are pretty sordid and I really don't have the stomach or desire to know how much is true or not true. There was another man involved who paid the girl to drop everything. The news story isn't pretty, but my brother claims the news story is wrong.

So should I or shouldn't I put up a website telling the world that my brother likes to sleep with 16-19 year old girls? If not, why not? — Tree Falls

Yes if you have facts and not just hearsay.

Here's another perspective. Many 16-19 year old girls like to have sex. Who's to say that the experience these girls had with your brother wasn't overwhelmingly a positive one. — Perplexed

With all due respect, whether or not a girl of 16 yrs old "likes to have sex" is irrelevant when you are speaking sex with a man over the age of 40 yrs old. @Hanover would know better than I what the law is but I can tell you what a mother or father of the age of 40 would think of such a pursuit.

Did these arguments relate in any way to your brothers attitude and behaviour towards women? — Perplexed

No. They were about politics, religion, life. They were never serious enough to cause a rupture. Before these events, I would have died for my brother.

Have you considered trying to rebuild the relationship so that you can be a positive influence to your brother? — Perplexed

My brother is a master rationalizer. He will say that it depends on the girl. My brother would argue in the grey area till the cows come home. And I admit, this isn't a black and white issue like pedophilia. There will be some people who have no problem with what my brother is doing, while they won't say the same for pedophilia. I disagree with those people and I think most parents would. But if enough people in our society thought this issue were important, the age of consent would be modified to account for age differences -- taking a moral issue and making it law.

Yes if you have facts and not just hearsay. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Wow, thanks for taking a stand and biting the bullet of consistency. No one else has.

The easiest way out for me is to tell my friend but not build the website. But right now, i don't see any reason why I am justified doing one but not the other. To my mind, it's either do both or neither. If I don't think my brother's behavior justifies building a website to tell the world, then I shouldn't tell my friend. But going public with this information would be insanely hard emotionally. It would probably destroy my relationship with my parents. A utilitarian might look at the cost to me and the benefit received by the girls who don't have relationships with my brother because of the website. Then see whether there is positive outcome.

But it sure is tough being objective about the costs and benefits when I will be the one bearing those costs.

With all due respect, whether or not a girl of 16 yrs old "likes to have sex" is irrelevant when you are speaking sex with a man over the age of 40 yrs old — ArguingWAristotleTiff

No, the individual girls experience of the situation is most certainly not irrelevant and ages are not worth a damn when considered in isolation which is why I was trying to establish whether harm was done.

Regardless of how your brother rationalises the situation, do you not think that having your support as a brother could be of benefit to him? It sounds like he is getting himself into some dubious situations with shady people and this could be indicative of some kind of crisis. The right support from people who have his best interests at heart could help to reduce the chance of similar incidents occurring in the future. Your role as a brother could help in this regard rather than trying to pursue more coercive methods or retributive justice.

Obviously how mature any particular sixteen-year-old will be in terms of personality and so forth can and does vary, and the law doesn't account for this distinction. The law can't account for it, because it would be too impractical to implement. But nevertheless, the fact remains that there are some sixteen year olds which are sufficiently adult-like in various respects, one of them being the ability to consent to sex. — Sapientia

Agreed, law necessarily has some Procrustean aspects. But the consent we're speaking of is legal consent. And law, too, is a statement of collective wisdom. Not everyone likes that. My own view is that persons of like age, and absent coercion, ought to be immune to prosecution for "consensual" sex. Two five-year-olds, two eight-year-olds, twelve, fifteen, seventeen: like age makes both guilty, and to my way of thinking they both cannot be guilty, and arguably neither separately can be guilty. But that's for like-age partners.

You assert as a fact "that there are some sixteen year olds which are sufficiently adult-like... to consent to sex." With whom under what circumstances for what purposes and reasons? And what evidence do you have that they can? And to be sure, to resolve these we're going to have to figure out what is meant by "sex." The community from time immemorial has decided and usually decreed that inequality between sexual partners is not a good thing to the point o proscribing it usually under threat of stern punishments.

There are also a matters of psychological, psycho-sexual, and physiological development. All these argue against adult/child sexual contact.

Your view of the matter seems to be if a person can engage and consents, then they should be free to do so. That view is less than a millimeter deep, and won't do.

Do children engage in sex? Of course they do. Most are better off for it. But in pretty much every case, those better off were in like-age relationships, with their peers. Those in unequal relationships usually are injured in some way. It may be statuary as opposed to violent, but there's still a reason it's called rape.

Here's another perspective. Many 16-19 year old girls like to have sex. Who's to say that the experience these girls had with your brother wasn't overwhelmingly a positive one. Have you spoken to any of them or have any reason to believe that your brothers actions have caused them harm? If not isn't it somewhat condescending for you to assume that they don't have minds of their own or can make decisions for themselves. — Perplexed

Here's another perspective: can I screw all the women in your family? Who knows, they might find it an overwhelmingly positive experience. On that chance, maybe I should screw all the women in your family. Indeed, if you think it through, you'll realize their views - and your views - on the matter don't matter!

It seems to me there is a lot of confusion in this thread. Re-read the OP. A man's community think him a bad actor, apparently for cause and good cause at that. That community includes family and the community where he was arrested twice. What should family do? Well, I buy the notion that they have some responsibility, some duty. Just what is hard to say. Public warning seems too much.

My brother is a master rationalizer. — Tree Falls

I don't know if the OP is a school exercise, or real. It doesn't matter. The brother, as portrayed, has sociopathic tendencies. With such a person you do not discuss, you do not reason, you do not argue. You do your best to set boundaries (not, actually, that you think best) that achieve what needs to be achieved, and resolve not to be buffaloed by the attacks that are pretty much sure to follow.

So, to clarify, you wouldn't tell your friend that your brother might try to have sex with his 16 year old daughter, given your brother's past history? — Tree Falls

What I meant by "Keep it in the family." would include the parents of the 14 year old visiting your family. Though, it might be more appropriate for your parents than you to discuss this with the parents of the 14 year old. The 14 year old should be included in a discussion about the matter, but it definitely is NOT your place to broach the topic with her alone, apart from her parents.

So, it looks like you have decided to publicize the facts and your suspicions about your brothers' sexual preferences either to the world, or to those immediately involved. My advice remains to "stick to those immediately involved and leave the world out of it".

Whatever you do, you won't be able to undo it. The web-site blatt would be pretty much impossible to recall or undo, so you should just not go there. If your brother ends up having sex with the 14 year old, and if her parents know about it and object, they can report your brother to the police and then the police can do whatever they will do.

Bear in mind, a round of hysteria within her family and police involvement might be worse for the 14 year old than the sex itself.

We live in 21st century U.S. For better or for worse, we have at least a double standard about sex. Nothing new in that statement. In various 21st century countries around the world, what is considered "old enough" varies, though 15, 16, or 17 seem to be the most common ages of consent. Even in the US, quite a few states have legislated that age-of-consent limitations don't apply to people within a 3 or 4 year age range. So, in these states, a 14 year old and a 18 year old would violate no laws about age of consent. Across the border in another state, a 17.9 year old and an 18 year old would be violating the law.

At various times in our history (not talking ancient history here, either--referencing 20th century) the standards of what was considered acceptable and unacceptable were fuzzier than they are now. There is no world-wide consensus, no over-time consensus, on sex and age differences. Almost everyone agrees that pre-pubescent children should not be approached for sex by older people.

Here's another perspective: can I screw all the women in your family? Who knows, they might find it an overwhelmingly positive experience. On that chance, maybe I should screw all the women in your family. Indeed, if you think it through, you'll realize their views - and your views - on the matter don't matter! — tim wood

Just to get this clear, apart from making sexual comments about my family, you are arguing that the views of the females engaged in sexual act do not matter. Is this correct?

Just to get this clear, apart from making sexual comments about my family, you are arguing that the views of the females engaged in sexual act do not matter. Is this correct? — Perplexed

Only based on your argument that (as I understood it)

Many 16-19 year old girls like to have sex. Who's to say that the experience these girls had with your brother wasn't overwhelmingly a positive one. Have you spoken to any of them or have any reason to believe that your brothers actions have caused them harm? If not isn't it somewhat condescending for you to assume that they don't have minds of their own or can make decisions for themselves. — Perplexed

Otherwise, (i.e., without your argument), the viewpoint is just as atrocious as I think you're implying it is. Or, to put it even another way, the argument that the sex is defensible on the grounds that a person of suspect competence might after the fact say it was a good experience, is a child's argument. From an adult it's absurd and a little disgusting.

the argument that the sex is defensible on the grounds that a person of suspect competence — tim wood

You are assuming suspect competence based on age alone.

I was trying to establish facts about the individuals involved, which I think is a better way to proceed.

Incidentally, I think it is noteworthy that my initial comment which was in part intended to defend to right of young women to consent to their own sexual relationships seemed to provoke an emotional reaction on your part.

Public warning seems too much — tim wood

Could you expand on why you think a public warning seems too much?

Could you expand on why you think a public warning seems too much? — Tree Falls

Due process. You are not a court.

Of course the friends, with a 14-year-old daughter, have a right to a warning about your brother.

Even if it wouldn't be legally culpable to withhold that information from them, you know that they have a right and a need to know about that

As for protecting other young girls from him, in ways such as you discussed, yes it would be justified and called-for. It's his own doing, and the situation isn't your fault. His history and tendency is consistent and persistent enough to constitute a danger that's the business of his potential victims and their parents.

The imperative isn't as strong as it is for the warning of the friends, but, as you said, why shouldn't other girls and their parents deserve warning too?

Michael Ossipoff

Due process. You are not a court. — Bitter Crank

Great point. Would the difference between telling my friends and telling the world be the private versus public nature of the statement?

What do you make of Bitter Crank's point that I am not a court?

I interpret it to mean that you can't jail him or put him on probation on your own authority, or order and require him to register as a sex-offender, etc.

But not being a court doesn't mean that you don't have freedom-of-speech, or that you're required to keep his sex-with-children secret.

Michael Ossipoff

You appear to look for. even find, a virtue in the act that in fact isn't there. It comes close to being a CYA exercise. There are a few approaches. First, perhaps, utility: does it accomplish what you want it to accomplish (btw, what, exactly, do you want to accomplish?). Answer, no. Second, deontological: is it consistent with a universal(izable) maxim? What would that maxim be? Everyone with a problem person in his or her family should publish a public warning? That doesn't seem quite right. Even your brother has a right to some privacy. If you really believe he's a threat to your community, then warn the targets (and as appropriate their parents). And warn your brother: with this last you needn't scruple to be completely reasonable or rational - after all, he isn't. Tell him what the tolerances are, what the consequences will be, and deliver them. That's the best you can do. For limits on what's good and what's legal, see a lawyer and a mental health professional.

At the same time, it seems pretty clear you need to look at your own investment in all of this. You're not your brother's keeper, nor can you protect the world. Look for some balance.

Incidentally, I think it is noteworthy that my initial comment which was in part intended to defend to right of young women to consent to their own sexual relationships seemed to provoke an emotional reaction on your part. — Perplexed

Whether or not there exist individuals under the legal age of consent who could reasonably consent is not the point. Whether there are in fact is arguable - but we grant that there might be. The point is that adults are presumed to be competent, and children are presumed to be incompetent. You mention a right of a (legal) infant to consent to his or her own sexual relationships. I am not aware of any such right. (As it happens, most rights in the US are held by adults. Children do not have the same rights as adults.) Could you please explicate your young woman's right? And why just young woman? Boys are under the same protections.

And you're right. These days I get a little short with outrageous, ignorant, fallacious, ill-informed arguments. There are too many of them out there.

You are assuming suspect competence based on age alone.

I was trying to establish facts about the individuals involved, which I think is a better way to proceed. — Perplexed

With adults, usually. With children, not. Maybe put in mind that there are no facts to speak of. Adults are held to be subject to the consequences of their actions. In short, adults get to make their own mistakes.
Children are supposed to be protected from those mistakes in the first place.

Would the difference between telling my friends and telling the world be the private versus public nature of the statement? — Tree Falls

Yes, the public vs. the private is a piece of it. When I say, "Due process. You are not a court." I mean
"you have not seen evidence from a prosecutor and the defense. You have heard no witnesses. You have not heard arguments by both sides; there has been no expert testimony. You are not a jury. You do not have the authority (like, given to you by the state) to declare to the public that your brother is a menace to young womanhood.

Limiting your action to members of your family and the couple with the 14 year old may damage relationship; may prevent harm; may cause harm; but, it is limited to yourself, your parents, your brother, and the couple with the 14 year old. That's already 7 people who might wish you had kept your nose out of it.

If you post your considered but unsubstantiated opinion on a public web site, the whole thing gets messier and nastier.

Of course, you are weighing the good of preventing the 14 year old from having an unpleasant encounter with your brother (the assumption being that it will be unpleasant) against the harm of doing nothing.

The situation recalls a piece of Buddhist advice, modeled after a cliche: "Don't just do something; stand there." Sometimes doing nothing is the best choice because you can not predict what any outcome will be.

In my own family I witnessed a very well-intentioned intervention to protect a sibling and child which poisoned relationships within the family for decades afterwards. I can't say that it was worth it. Once done, it could not be undone.

Once you are convinced of the righteousness of your proposed action, you, like me and everybody else, will put the pedal to the metal and roar off down the road to your good, bad, or indifferent rendezvous with destiny.

Good luck.