You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
On age consent...
- Thread starter sevenblu
- Start date
Originally posted by James R
But perhaps you disagree (?)
well james, you are so reasonable it is hard to disagree with you. however i would suggest...."but I would argue very strongly that we are in a better position to set the bar than, for example, a tribal society."...you let them decide. if you cannot/will not, dig out a tribe and indicate the changes you would make in their society and show me how they would benefit.
for instance it is this zeal, "argue very strongly", that forced the dusky young maidens of tahiti to cover their nakedness (semi) and inhibit their sexuality.
Last edited:
I think people should have sex when they think they are ready
Well, really, this is going to happen anyway - laws or not. I don't think north american society is as hypocritcal and uptight about sex as Repo Man for example has portrayed. I mean, go past a supermarket check out - it's almost impossible to find a magazine there without some kind of article on "His Sexual Desires Revealled" or "How to Get The Sex You Want" - never mind the magazines on the high shelves.
When making laws we have to balance the fact that young people are going to experiment with the fact that there are predators out there who will exploit the innocent.
I've spent a couple years working in a sexual assault centre and all I can say is that it's very infrequent for a blatant sexual assault to result in a conviction, so I'm not worried in the least about kids getting charged for consentually fooling around.
It does worry me when people start using the law as a basis for defining what is right - ie. "she is x years old so technically this is legal." Laws are established by community standards. There's no scientific data that states when a person turns x years old, he or she is suddenly endowed with the wisdom to understand his or her actions. Instead, we look at our population and our society our culture, make a judgement and set a limit above which the individual may assume responsibility for his or her actions.
Sure there will be different societies in the world and through time that vary in where they set this limit. What one has to remember though is that circumstances are different. Some societies had to set this limit low because people only lived for an average of 30 years, and the mental and emotional stability of adolescents took a back seat to survival of the tribe.
Anyway, it's getting late, so I'll just close this post by reiterating my point in an earlier post. If you're trying to convince yourself that your attraction to someone under the age of consent is okay by drawing on examples that are inconsistent with the laws of your own society, you need to take a closer look at yourself.
well said dragoon
early civs had to get an early start because they weren't around very long. if you're going to have a dozen kids by the time you die at 25, you'd better get crackin by the age of 12.
early civs had to get an early start because they weren't around very long. if you're going to have a dozen kids by the time you die at 25, you'd better get crackin by the age of 12.
Good point, how, if at all, would anyone justify prosecuting a 30 year old man for having "sexual relations" with a 16 year old girl when she has already slept with 5 other men?
Many girls lose their virginity by the age of 13 or 14 (some younger), anyway. As some have pointed out they do it with or without consent with their peers. I have, in my high school days, known quite a few young ladies to get taken advantage of at parties because they were "buzzed" and weren't in their right mind. It was legal, age wise, but they were certainly not well treated... most were used the one time and never spoken to again.
I have also met a handful of young ladies, in my time, who have lied to me about their age....
How would a man be protected by the law by a young girl dressing up and lying about her age to get laid? He would not, if the parents prosecuted, he would go up the creek for it.
Just some more food for thought.
Many girls lose their virginity by the age of 13 or 14 (some younger), anyway. As some have pointed out they do it with or without consent with their peers. I have, in my high school days, known quite a few young ladies to get taken advantage of at parties because they were "buzzed" and weren't in their right mind. It was legal, age wise, but they were certainly not well treated... most were used the one time and never spoken to again.
I have also met a handful of young ladies, in my time, who have lied to me about their age....
How would a man be protected by the law by a young girl dressing up and lying about her age to get laid? He would not, if the parents prosecuted, he would go up the creek for it.
Just some more food for thought.
grrrr always with the underaged girls. i refuse to believe boys mature emotionally any faster than girls do. it is well known they mature slower.
i'd like to add the case if the teacher who had two babies by a 13 year old student into the mix. or the women who made her teenaged lover kill her husband.
i'd like to add the case if the teacher who had two babies by a 13 year old student into the mix. or the women who made her teenaged lover kill her husband.
YEs, according to studies, women mature faster than men. I have no links to this (didn't bother to look) but I have heard/seen this many times.
I view the situation the exact same with underage boys also... same situations can apply, but for some reason it's "the poor helpless girls who must be protected", yeah right!
I view the situation the exact same with underage boys also... same situations can apply, but for some reason it's "the poor helpless girls who must be protected", yeah right!
The reason I was trying to correct the misconception about Lolita is because most people comment on the story/book, perhaps having seen the film, and that she is seduced by H. As the book is supposed to have been written by H. and from his point of view he writes as thought she seduces him and uses the argument that he wasn’t even her first.
Peoples remarks concerning the book is like most of the arguments concerning under age children. People have heard of studies and findings but don’t check to see if they are just myths or how ‘emotional maturity’ was measured. And I have no reason to suggest that they do so unless they are interested.
However I would suggest that what is important is not the act which is carried out, but how it is viewed by society and the children surroundings. A relationship between two children may still be sexual and innocent until it reaches the eyes of the parents.
Has anyone read the Kinsley report?
Peoples remarks concerning the book is like most of the arguments concerning under age children. People have heard of studies and findings but don’t check to see if they are just myths or how ‘emotional maturity’ was measured. And I have no reason to suggest that they do so unless they are interested.
However I would suggest that what is important is not the act which is carried out, but how it is viewed by society and the children surroundings. A relationship between two children may still be sexual and innocent until it reaches the eyes of the parents.
Has anyone read the Kinsley report?
"A relationship between two children may still be sexual and innocent until it reaches the eyes of the parents."
anyone remember playing doctor?
anyone remember playing doctor?
Originally posted by SwedishFish
anyone remember playing doctor?
We are two sisters. one year apart. I was always the doctor. I remember one time, I was five and she was four, my parents went for a nap and me and my sister started playing doctor. I got the thermometer and stuck it in her butt to take her temprature, then as I pulled it out it didn't come out....My sister started asking what is wrong, and all I was doing was saying nothing, nothing, don't worry, 10 minutes later, she started freaking, and I told her that before she goes to mom and dad, we should agree on the story, but she wasn't in the mood for my suggestions, my sis was at my parent's bed with pants half down and a thermometer stuck to her butt.
Let's just say, we had a lot of explaining to do.
How would a man be protected by the law by a young girl dressing up and lying about her age to get laid? He would not, if the parents prosecuted, he would go up the creek for it.
This is an interesting point. Surely there are underage girls (and guys for that matter) who look older than they are. But the bottom line is that we live in a buyer beware society and as an adult, this man is responsible for his actions. Legally (in Canada anyway), one must obtain consent to engage in sexual relations. In order for that consent to be legal, it must come from a person who is of age to give it, who is not coerced into giving it, and who is sober.
Now before anyone jumps on me and says "Hey man, chill out! It's sex. It's not like we have to sign a contract." I'll say I agree. I'm just pointing out how the law looks at things. That and if you're so stupid that you get duped by a little girl then I don't have any sympathy for you.
how, if at all, would anyone justify prosecuting a 30 year old man for having "sexual relations" with a 16 year old girl when she has already slept with 5 other men?
What does her history have to do with it? Some people would see this as an older man taking advantage of a teenager with low self esteem. (For the record, where I'm from this would not be considered a crime.) This is exactly like asking "How, if at all, would anyone justify prosecuting a burglar for breaking into a house that's already been broken into five times before?"
coolsoldier
Registered Senior Member
Originally posted by Dragoon
This is exactly like asking "How, if at all, would anyone justify prosecuting a burglar for breaking into a house that's already been broken into five times before?"
or "How, if at all, would anyone justify prosecuting a burglar for breaking into a house whose owners invited him in and gave him all their posessions?"
[edit: spelling]