My view is this:
Under a certain age, specified by law for the reasons that the person described is not adult enough to make a full consensual decision, there always arises a counter position of responsibility on someone older to actually not take advantage of this (theoretical) inability to consent.
This is worse when the person taking advantage is in a position of authority or power over the young person - for the very obvious reason that there exists the very good chance of coercion, intentional or merely perceived by the young man to be such.
So - while a young man in that position may not FEEL victimised, he is, in fact and in law, being so victimised, due to his theoretical inability to consent and possible coercion. The law and convention do not run of FEELing, unless you are a feminist.
If you allow that older women can break this law and this social convention, then you must allow that others, including priests, carers of orphans and such, and so on, can do the same.
If you want true equality, you must accept that all are equally responsible for behaving responsibly.
Igor - you remember that gorgeous teacher we had? Mamma Mia! The boys all died a thousand deaths when she married! Talk about weeping, wailing and a gnashing of teeth!!
And wasn't she sweet, with me her favourite, too! All woman, that one!! That was when I first read Freud - in her library! Couldn't make head or tail of it.