The latest story to capture the imagination of the self-righteous on social media involves an adult man caught trying to get a 13-year-old to strip on video chat. The 13-year-old turned out to be fictional, the product of a vigilante's imagination - read all about it here:http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20150613/local/sexual-predator-under-investigation-after-men-pose-as-13-year-old-girl.572314

But that is neither here nor there. I have no intention of delving into the actual merits of the case. Trial by Facebook is not a principle I hold dear, and hysterical petitions to send someone to jail "NOW" are hardly a proud defining moment of democracy. And no, this does not mean I approve of this man's alleged actions - far from it. 

But, aside from the individual case, there is a very disturbing trend gaining ground in the collective consciousness. Comments related to the issue were divided in two, clear opposing camps; the afore-mentioned  'stone him now'  group and the equally-worrying '13-year-olds nowadays are sluts, so it's ok for an adult to engage sexually with them'.

The hive mind's argument goes something along these lines: today's teenagers are very sexually aware. They are not as innocent as they used to be. And - shock horror - they run around in very skimpy clothing and hooker heels. 

All the above is disturbingly true in too many cases. But this does not mean that young teenagers  have suddenly become fair game, or that an adult is justified in taking sexual advantage of them. 

When a child - and a 13-year-old is a child, no matter how 'wise' she (I use the female pronoun consciously) seems - is sexually compromised, the fault always lies with the adult. There are no two ways about it.

Unfortunately, a sizeable section of internet experts seem to believe that if a 13-year-old puts on make-up and a miniskirt, then she is being 'provocative'' and 'asking for it'. 

There is no polite way to say this, so I will just call it as it is: such statements are stupid and irresponsible .

Shaming any female for the way she dresses is wrong. When that female is a child, the wrongness reaches stratospheric levels. Too many people still believe that a woman in skimpy clothes - particularly if she has had a couple of drinks - is fair game for sexual harrassment, and even rape. 

Granted, it is not a particularly wise move for any woman to put herself in that situation.  But this does not mean that any random passing Joe has the right to put his dirty paws on her with impunity, either. 

Sexual abuse is sexual abuse, no matter what the victim happened to be wearing. To state otherwise implies that we accept the law of the jungle, of might is right; that acting upon our animal instinct is fine. 

And if you are one of those people who try to paint some 13-year-old as a seasoned Jezebel, well what can I say? You really need to rethink your approach to morality. 

One particularly disgusting phrase kept cropping up on a number of online fora yesterday and this morning: 'tifla ta' 13 taf twaqqghu ragel illum'. The rough translation being that a 13-year-old has the power to make a man fall into temptation.

Excuse me? Have we reached a state where wrongdoing can be legally justified just because a man was not strong enough to control his base instincts? Society will be in a fine pickle if we follow through on that logic: any man feeling a bit hot under the collar can just grab at any passing female who catches his fancy with impunity..."ghax waqqghetu, miskin". 

I can just imagine the defence: "It's not my client's fault he raped that random woman. Her cleavage was showing/her jeans were too tight/she was sunbathing topless... U waqqghetu, miskin."
Judge: "Ah yes, sounds legit. Glad we cleared that up, then. Go forth and multiply, my son."

But no, we do not accept those kind of arguments in this supposedly enlightened age. Instead, we call such crimes by the name they deserve: rape. And this is also the reason why we can never justify the actions of an adult male when he sexually engages with a 13-year-old with stupidities like "she asked for it".

No matter what a 13-year-old says, no matter what she wears, no matter how 'provoacatively' she acts, the fault for whatever happens next always lies with the adult in that particular situation. 

Placing the blame on the child or on her parents is just not on. Yes, parents need to be more aware of what their kids are doing online, of what they are wearing and what company they keep. Yes, some parents are guilty of not doing enough to safeguard their offspring's untarnished childhood.

But this in no way removes the legal and moral responsibility of an adult man to keep it in his pants around minors. Because when faced with a 13-year-old in 'provocative' attire, there is only one thing that an honest adult man will do. And that is walk away.