Age of Consent

[Punky]

http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/aug03/163688.asp

i found this article and thought what you people think about the topic? should it be up to consenting individuals, or should it be set by law? i'm not going to do a poll on this, as i think it seems more interesting just to argue about it. enjoy

[gilgamesj]

Yeah, this sort of thing puzzles me, if they're both consenting then it isn't rape... but is it paedophilia by the boy cos the girl's under age? (it tends not to be seen as the other way round )

Also what about Porn.. its got an 18yr old certificate, however, sex is legal to 16 year olds...

its all a bit of a shame imo :/

[Dr. X]

Personally, I think 16 is about right.

Many people under 16 (and even some over 16) with whom I've grown up with are far too immature to be having sexual relationships. It takes time and maturity for children (and at 16 you are still a child) to be mentally stable enough to be part of a two-way sexual relationship.

Sure, some people a ready by 15 but having the limit at 16 sends a 'so what? you're still too young' message to the rest of them.

Sex @ 16, Porn @ 18, Homosexual sex @ 18, it's a funny ol' country

[THCi]

I think it should be at 18, it would stop some (not all) of teenage pregnancies.

[Saracen]

Originally posted by THCi
I think it should be at 18, it would stop some (not all) of teenage pregnancies.

But would it?

After all, the age of consent at 16 doesn't stop a lot of under-16 pregancies. There's an old adage that says of teenagers, basically, that if they're gonna, they're gonna.

On the original point, it seems to me from what we are told of the background and attitude of these two, that there is much more to the reasoning behind the prosecution than simply that they were caught at it. It is more an issue with overall behavioural patterns.

More generally, I think you have a moral overlap between when consent can genuinely be given. Technically, I guess, that is at 16. Below that, you are deemed not tp have the maturity to understand all the implications.

Why someone should be an immature child incapable of rational understanding at 15 years, 364 days, 23 hours and 59 minutes, and then suddenly, magically, one minute later, be a mature, rational adult, beats me.

My PERSONAL opinion is that you grow in maturity more and more over the years, as you experience life. 25 doesn't mean fully mature any more than 16 does. Most 25 years still have a lot, and I mean a LOT, to learn. Of course, most of them won't agree with that - privately - even if they say they do. I don't know when, or if, this stops. When I'm 70, I'll probably be agog at how immature a 50-year old I was

But if maturity is an on-going process, from a practical perspective you simply have to draw a line somewhere and say that is the age of consent.

Sex before that age is therefore illegal, but that doesn't mean the authorities have to use the option to prosecute, even though it is there. It gives them the discretion to do so, and that seems to have been what happened in the quoted case.

[Slick]

I think 16 is right, before that you're not generally not ready and I think 18 would be too extreme (men reach their sexual peak at 18, you need to do some building up), think it should be 16 for gay people as well.

As far as porn goes 18 is about right as you're an adult then and you shouldn't be able to watch or "perform" in such movies till then.

[Big RICHARD]

Originally posted by Slick
I think 16 is right, before that you're not generally not ready and I think 18 would be too extreme (men reach their sexual peak at 18, you need to do some building up), think it should be 16 for gay people as well.

As far as porn goes 18 is about right as you're an adult then and you shouldn't be able to watch or "perform" in such movies till then.

Men's sexual peak is around 16. It should be 16 for EVERYONE. If you can do it you should be able to watch it! (Not the other way round though! Thinkin murder!)

[Slick]

Originally posted by Big RICHARD
Men's sexual peak is around 16. It should be 16 for EVERYONE.

Didn't I say it should be 16 for everyone? and I'm not sure where you heard the peak was 16.

Originally posted by Big RICHARD
If you can do it you should be able to watch it!

So it'd be ok to show a video with lots of swearing in to a 5 year old cos he swears? I see your logic but it's much harder to distinguish a 15/16 yr old than a 17/18 yr old and at 16 you're not legally an adult so hardcore sex shops shouldn't serve these ppl. Also if you're saying they should be able to watch it....should they be able to perform in a porn movie at 16?

[Big RICHARD]

Originally posted by Slick
Didn't I say it should be 16 for everyone? and I'm not sure where you heard the peak was 16.


So it'd be ok to show a video with lots of swearing in to a 5 year old cos he swears?

1 Yes, you did (I was agreeing) and
2 no you shouldn't!

Originally posted by Slick
I see your logic but it's much harder to distinguish a 15/16 yr old than a 17/18 yr old and at 16 you're not legally an adult so hardcore sex shops shouldn't serve these ppl.

Yes, they should.

Originally posted by Slick
Also if you're saying they should be able to watch it....should they be able to perform in a porn movie at 16?

Yes.

[Slick]

I wonder if you ever have a girl when she's 16 and still in school you'd be happy with hundreds of pervs watching videos of her doing unspeakable things to men

[Knoxville]

hmmmmm i think its about right at 16 tbh, but the porn thing is a point i've been making for years.

People who star in porn SHOULD have to be 18 imho, The legal age of consent may be 16 in this country but in america and other countries its 18. 16 may be the consenting age for sex but thats sex between you and someone else and only you and your partner will see it, its a helluva lot different to having it put on dvd and shipped around the world and imo you should have to be mature enough to make the decision and not get pressured into it.

Now to BUY porn i think 16 should be fine in this country, if you can do it why can't you watch other people doing it? by the governments logic on this you shouldn't be able to see the sex your having when your 16 and you're only able to actually open your eyes for sex when your 18

[FluxCapacitor]

Lets look at the full on perspective. Sex is sex, people want to have sex. What the law says makes no difference to them.

For instance. When you want to go out drinking under age. It's ileagal under the age of 18 but people still do it. Why? because they 'WANT' to.

You are never going to be able to curbe teenage instinct. The more you tell a teen they can do something, the more they will do it! 16 is a stupid age to legalize sex. I lost my virginity before i was 16, although my partner was over 16 and i wish I hadn't. You loose alot of you childhood mental securities.

As far as porn is concerned. I don't think anybody in there right mind would want there friends to see them doing things to other men. However from a male point of view if a woman is seen doing it, she will probably be called a slag or a slut. If a man is seen doing it, he will be prasied by his mates for everything and they will boast about it for years. How annoying is that?!?

Personally I would make it all 18. That however is only my opinion.

~Chris

[fondie]

the most disturbing thing about that story is that it's the kids parents that grass them up each time!

those 2 kids have done nothing wrong in my eyes, so maybe i wouldn't want my daughter having sex at 14, but to me it's not a criminal offence. laws like that don't stop kids from having sex, it just makes it more difficult for them to come forward if they've got any questions or need help. i think it would be far better if kids were better educated about sex, and were given support if they needed it. the fact is that lots of kids DO have sex under the age of 16, it's better to stand up and face the issues that come about because of that rather than persecuting the kids, which does no one any favours!

[spikegifted]

Hey, those kids can have sex as young as they want, as long as they both consent and they don't ended up being teenage parents.

Agree to have sex is just fine by me... But having kids is a complete different matter!!

Think about it, for those of you who are in your late 20s... Take yourselves back to your teenage years and be honest with yourselves - how many of you actually knew what you were doing? This is not a trick question. Also, you need to distinguish between 'really knew what you were doing' and 'actually thought you knew what you were doing'! Those two are very different things.

Since the title of this thread doesn't seem to directly related to teenage parenthood, I'll leave it at that. If there's more discussions, I'd return with some of my, some may think rather old fashion. thoughts.

[fondie]

that's one of the main reasons i think kids should be better educated about sex rather than attempting to hide them from it, they're going to do it anyway so your best off making sure they're well educated and have a support system there for when they need it. what's use is taking them to court? if it wasn't so sad, it would be an almost comical sentance, being charged with attempted sex with your consenting partner! it's quite clear that the current system isn't working to prevent teenage pregnancies, and i'm not at all suprised, it just doesn't deal with the real world situation. 13/14 year old kids go out to parties, get drunk, have sex drives, the result is blatently obvious! kids aren't interested in petty laws which (as long as your own parents don't grass you up) there is 0 chance of being caught, and even if you are you'd be v.unlucky to get charged with anything! they're rebellious, teenagers are, the whole fact of making it illegal doesn't help. so try something else, educate rather than dicatate what they should do, i'm sure many teenage parents would rather not have tied themselves down with kids at such early ages, or regretted sleeping with the wrong person, at the wrong time, or wished they'd been better educated about sexually transmitted diseases before they'd slept with the village bike without a condom, but they just didn't know any better at the time because their parents / teachers / censored media etc pretended it didn't happen.

[eldren]

Education over sex does diddly-squat to prevent it from happening. All the warning in the world does nothing to decrease its occurance. Take a look at all the AIDS education being thrown around, especially in my country. And yet AIDS cases are still increasing. Why? In my personal opinion, stupidity is a major contributing factor.

People are stupid. You can teach them the ABC for preventing STDs (Abstain, Be faithful, or Condomise), but when it comes to the crunch, most people will happily forget/ignore it.

Another factor, I feel, is moral decay. Take someone from a hundred years ago, and they'd be horrified at how people today live. Also, the attitude towards sex, how getting into someone's pants is seeing as "scoring," is at fault. Everyone wants to be a winner, "score" a goal. Thank you, peer pressure. Thank you, media brainwashing.

Have we forgotten that, originally, the only people having sex were those who were married, or those considered immoral, ala houses of ill repute? It certainly seems so.

The value placed on sex has declined, its status degraded to a common "sport," a pleasurable passtime. And I don't see how, if that doesn't change, teenage pregnancies will ever stop.