Poll: The age of consent

[AdmiralWolverineLightningbolt]

it should be 14 for many reasons - mainly there's nothing wrong with 2 14 year olds fucking each other

but it also applies to the fatc that by 14, girls start looking a lot older and can fairly easily get into an 18+ club where she'll be picked up by some guy who assumes she must be 18+ and then fucks her but her dad isnt happy and prosecutes and said guy ends up on sex offenders register

if youve seen trainspotting (i know that actor isnt actually 15 but ive seen 15 yr olds who look older) you'll know how easily it can happen
but yes, there is seriously something wrong with a 30 yr old fucking a 14 yr old

maybe a law like until the age of 18, you can only have sex with someone within 2 yrs of your age with not knowing the age counting as a legal defence for the accident i described abpve in that situation or something...
cause i live in england, and the idea of a 30 yr old fucking even a 16 yr old is disgusting and should count as paedophilia if they know

 

[Mockingjay]

It's 16 here in England but people generally have sex when they're ready, earlier or later.

 

[AdmiralWolverineLightningbolt]

Incidentally, lowest AOC in Europe? Vatican city. 12.

Well it's not like there's going to be a lot of sex there anyways.

Bwahahaha, or so you'd like to think, eh? eh?!

god, that's disgusting
the one place where it should be a lot higher for at least 2 good reasons
this reminds me of south park and reinstalls the idea that all catholic priests are involved

shit that's ridiculous

 

[Karhax]

Over here in Sweden it is 15.
I think is just fine.

18 however is a bit older than necessary i think.

 

[blindey]

18, which is the average age of the high school graduate. Honestly, there's no real reason to have sex until after you at least get out of high school.

How about...because it's fun? It's part of (or can be but let's face it..it is a part of relationships, whatever the nature or ideas toward it are) relationships. I've known of people that have sex as young as like 12, regardless of the law or not. I think one of, if not THE, main issue is treating children like criminals. Either A) they're "innocent" and thus not responsible for having sex and shouldn't be punished if they do, or B) they are cognizent of their actions and whatnot, and should be treated accordingly, having more rights in that regard.

It just goes to show you that when you treat someone like a child, they act like a child. Treat them like adults, they act like adults.

Yep, there's a few different things that happen when people are expected to do x or y - surprise surprise if you treat them intelligently just by virtue of that they'll be better on tests and whatnot, and if you set the bar low, then they'll be low. (more or less but that's how it works)

As an educator, I think that adults having sex with minors is an act of taking advantage of a developing mind and body that has has not yet reached their potential of maturity. It is downright wrong and low.

Personally I think there should be a different age ranges that determines what people you can be in relationships with, and IQ tests should play a factor as well.

In your...system I guess you'd call it, if this would apply to adults engaging in acts with other consenting adults then it would be struck down immediately, and I would agree with that. What would the point be in restricting the behavior of two people who are informed and consent to whatever it is that they're doing?

The other thing I wanted to comment on 'bout this is with the IQ tests part. Recently I've become...not disenchanted but more educated about them and have to opine that IQ tests in any form to determine things (mental competence, etc) are pretty sketchy at best. I've seen cases in which someone has let's say a mental illness such as I dunno Asperger's, ADD, just pick one, and that influenced their test scores, showing signs that they were below average IQ. It's a factor that can be the downfall of any test taking - external or internal factors of a person that screw it up. Anyway, my whole point is that it isn't a good measure in that way in which you want to use it.

Watch the movie "Kids". It will show with horrifying detail why we need an age of consent. Seriously, the movie borders on kiddie porn. Both boys and girls can be predatory and you need a way to stop that sort of behavior.

On the other hand we are abusing the laws we have in order to promote puritanical ideas. Children should not be put on a sex offender list for being children.

Um..Maybe it's just me but I did "research" (you know, a google search) on the movie and it basically boils down to a lot of drug use, some date rape, and promiscuity, and you bring this up to further...what point again? I'm not really seein' the connection. In regards to the part about both sexes can be predatory, you're arguing that the age of consent laws stop / diminish that?

 

[EvilDictator]

Strictly speaking in this day and age it doesn't matter what the age of consent is - teenagers just don't care, and they'll do whatever they want, regardless of the repercussions.

I voted 18, because a lot of young people these days are getting themselves pregnant and they end up ruining their lives because they didn't take the necessary precautions, and thus got themselves or someone else up the duff.
They need to be taught properly - sex can lead to diseases or babies if you don't do the right thing and use protection - and it is abundantly clear that they are either not being told these things or listening.

Which brings me to my first point - if they aren't listening, then there's no point in trying to stop them, right?

Of course - there cannot be no age of consent, otherwise all the sick people in this world will be getting away scot free when they rape youngters. But I still stand by 18 years old, as long as there was a way to enforce it - which of course, there isn't.

 

[Ancientgamer]

There's a fine line between the questions of "Should kids have sex at 14" And "should kids be allowed to have sex at 14". Of course I think they should be allowed, but I pity any twat who actually abuses that right.


I also think there's no way to set a global standard on common sense or circumstance. So I think it's fine for a 21 year old to do it with a 13 year old. If the elder takes advantage of a kid, let it be settled in civil court.

 

[Rigs83]

13 is too young to know any better but that said kids are too stupid to be responsible so they will screw up. I just hope that the laws in the US reflect that and not punish kids for life for making stupid mistakes like sexting or posting nude photos online.

 

[A random person]

Well, looking at this logically, 13 or so is probably a good age. I Knew kids who were fucking about at 12 or so. To be honest kids are gonna have sex before 18, most likely before 16 or 15 even. And really its not a problem at that age because they can clearly decide for themselves. The problems come about at earlier ages as well as abuse of the law.

Such as, in Arizona at least, if two 16 year olds have consensual sex together then BOTH of them can and actually have been labeled sex offenders.

To me at least, people should be able to do whatever the fuck they want to their bodies as long as they can make an informed decision about it.

It appears I'm not the crazy guy who barges in with youth rights this time.

By 13, most kids who's parents aren't terrible should know enough about sex, like contraception and what sex basically is, to make an informed decision. Much more is simply prudishness.

 

[jamesworkshop]

16 is fine for the Uk however I can't understand why porn is 18 surely its a lot safer than actual sex (STD's), considering that by 17 you can drive a car/get married and have children but are somehow unable to have the maturity to deal with a skin mag.

 

[Pezzer]

Hmm. I'm good with the 14 limit here in Canada

It's 14 in canada?

Now all the worlds Pedos are packing their bags and moving there.

 

[Verbera]

And no, the age shouldn't be different for homosexual acts. There's no real difference.

I'm pretty sure you're talking LEGALLY, but you're forgetting one important thing: there's no possible way to get pregnant.

It's possible for some homosexual couples to get pregnant. Gender =/= sex, and everything. /nitpicking

I'd say sixteen is just fine. It sucks for those kids who hit puberty fairly early and would be interested in sex soon, but the way young kids are overscripted when it comes to sex these days sixteen is good - younger teenagers will probably still be experimenting with each other, but I'd like laws to protect children from adults. Sixteen-year-olds are, in my opinion, more likely to be able to handle sex than younger teenagers.

 

[Dylar]

Somebody else already made the point, but I'm too lazy to hunt it down to quote it.

The age of consent is not about teenagers boning teenagers. Its about the age that the law allows those teenagers to bone/be boned by adults. A low vote is a vote for Chris Hanson haters.

 

[Colonel Rosso]

14 is the age req in Canada? Didn't know they had sex up there... I thought they reproduced asexually? The more you know!

Yeah, those canadians seem really polite and clean, but there're a few who break this rule, and they're more inclined to have intercourse than the most drunken American boozehound. This group mostly lives near the Acadian coast. I visit northern Main alot, so that's freakin awesome for me.

My opinion on the matter?
before the age of 16, only within two years.
for homosexual acts, only within two years at 16, to prevent abuse

 

[Theissen]

it should be 14 for many reasons - mainly there's nothing wrong with 2 14 year olds fucking each other

but it also applies to the fatc that by 14, girls start looking a lot older and can fairly easily get into an 18+ club where she'll be picked up by some guy who assumes she must be 18+ and then fucks her but her dad isnt happy and prosecutes and said guy ends up on sex offenders register

if youve seen trainspotting (i know that actor isnt actually 15 but ive seen 15 yr olds who look older) you'll know how easily it can happen
but yes, there is seriously something wrong with a 30 yr old fucking a 14 yr old

maybe a law like until the age of 18, you can only have sex with someone within 2 yrs of your age with not knowing the age counting as a legal defence for the accident i described abpve in that situation or something...
cause i live in england, and the idea of a 30 yr old fucking even a 16 yr old is disgusting and should count as paedophilia if they know

The question in this post is who to protect.

Men who are lured by young girls, or
girls who are manipulated by grown men.

Here, it's clear that men should be protected by girls with no good intentions. And I agree in the sense that it's absolutely horrible how destructive some people can be. But what's the consequence if there was a lower AoC?
My mind is on the young girls, who have no ill intentions, that are manipulated by older men.

I'd say it's a pretty big burden on such young shoulders to watch out for themselves whereas it's much easier as a grown adult to judge the situation.

In my country, the AoC is 16, which is a fairly appropriate age. At this age, people are beginning to take their lives in their own hands and choosing their further education all by themselves.

 

[Malevolent Stranger]

I don't pay attention to the law in my country, though most of my friends had sex at twelve or thirteen.

 

[magnuslion]

The age of the older party /2 +7 is the minimum age for the younger party. (Applies 14+) Not just for schtupping but dating in general, outside of this bubble is creepy.

Thief!

LOL!!!

anyways im good with fourteen, but i think you shouldnt date or have sex with someone 7 years younger than yourself, and i personally draw the line around 24. ((im 29))

 

[thedailylunatic]

(Baleeted)

 

[MrGFunk]

Incidentally, lowest AOC in Europe? Vatican city. 12.

Well it's not like there's going to be a lot of sex there anyways.

You'd be surprised.

Not as surprised as some twelve year olds in vatican city.

I think it shouldn't be that young.
Kids try to push boundaries so most lose their virginity early.

If the age is set people start to feel strange if the age passes some would feel pressured to "get rid of it". I don't want to see 12 year olds pressured into losing their virginity. That's really messed up.

Susan Arendt makes an excellent point for Age of Consent discussion.

This isn't just about teenagers shagging other teenagers, guys. If you make the age of consent, say, 13, that means a 30 year old could legally have sex with a 13-year-old. And that is just not on. No way, no how.
.

 

[Captain Pancake]

mmm, crayons...

i'm good with the sixteen limit in the UK. now, back to the crayons...

over here, we use felt tip pens...