The first book-length study of American statutory rape laws, Jailbait investigates the double-edged nature of legislation aimed at both protecting and punishing adolescent sexuality. Carolyn Cocca explores how, throughout the history of the United States, the regulation of sexual behavior was seized upon as a means to alleviate larger problems, be they moral, social, political, or economic. Feminists, religious conservatives, and legislators, each with their own agendas, have at times both conflicted and cooperated over legislation, leading to uneasy compromises that play out in the ways in which the laws are implemented today. Using both detailed case studies and quantitative analysis, Jailbait examines important changes made to statutory rape laws since the 1970s, including prosecutions under the laws. Among the more surprising findings is that changes to statutory rape laws were sometimes made in opposition to prevailing public opinion, contrary to previous studies that have asserted morality policy is especially responsive to public opinion.
I'm fond of legal nerdery but this is a bit dry and specialized even by that standard. Cocca looks at New Jersey, California and Georgia and how and why their statutory rape laws changed in the 20th century. What interested me was the way so many different groups had different views on the topic, supporting the laws because they wanted to punish teenage sex, discourage teen pregnancy, protect kids from adult predators, protect virginal girls from adults men ... the laws about "jailbait" have served many purposes.