1. No, I do not agree with the outcome of the Michael M case. There are many reasons why I argue that the Michael M case is not fair. One of the main reason is that Michael M is being held liable for his action but the female is not. It did not state that he forced her to have sex. So if they both agreed upon having sex then they both shall be held liable for their actions. I understand that the court argument was that only women can become pregnant and they suffer more consequences to sexual activities. I argue against that statement. There are males who get emotionally attached to females after sex who end up getting hurt broken also. Males can also suffer consequences such as STD’s. There has even been incident were females were found to be the abuser against the male in sexual activities. Michael was older than the girl by a year which is not a big difference. At 17 and 16 they are both high school students who are under the age of 18. If he was 18 or older and this occurred I would think differently about the situation. Another reasons I argue against the …show more content…
I think most feminists would agree upon the Supreme Court’s reasoning. Feminist are people who suppose women so of course that think they should have the upper hand. Although, feminist do believe that should be equal to men. The Supreme Court reasoning would show that women are not equal to men. The Supreme Court is actually making women look weak by stating that “only women suffer disproportionately and profound physical, and psychological consequences from sexual activity”. I don’t know much about feminist but I do know they don’t like to be looked as a disadvantage compared to men and that state definitely makes them look like they are at a disadvantage. It is possible that some feminist may disagree with the Supreme Court reasoning. Since there seeking for equality treatment as men. The Supreme Court reasoning definitely does not show equality between the two genders which could upset many