Poll: The age of consent
- Thread starter bjj hero
- Start date
Recommended Videos
In Canda it's 12 for if you do it with people within 2 years i.e. a 12 and 13, 12 and 12, 13 and 13.
After you're 16 it's with whoever you want, so long as you don't do anal. Wich is wierd, because that has an age of consent of 18, while everything else is legal after you're 12.
I don't really get that...
As an actual answer, if you have hit puberty and you have the parts, are willing to live with the consequences and have a willing partner who meets the previous criteria as well, go for it. It's your life.
After you're 16 it's with whoever you want, so long as you don't do anal. Wich is wierd, because that has an age of consent of 18, while everything else is legal after you're 12.
I don't really get that...
As an actual answer, if you have hit puberty and you have the parts, are willing to live with the consequences and have a willing partner who meets the previous criteria as well, go for it. It's your life.
Personally, I think around the 16 mark is good, but I believe it depends along on the maturity (emontional, mental and physical) of the individuals involved. Unfortunatly, teenage mums prove that it's the ones who lack the first two types who are starting early. If the number of people reproducing while still in school is low, then the age is about right. I do think that is important that people understand sex before they start having it though (ie are properly educated).
There should be absolutly no difference between hetro and homo ages.
There should be absolutly no difference between hetro and homo ages.
Statistically speaking, gay men are at higher risk of having HIV and anal is a very transmissive sex act for HIV. Period. I've known gay men who've used blood donation as a "free bi-monthly STD test" and that's fucked up beyond belief. There is no right to blood donation, especially if you're a risk factor.thenathannathan said:
Everyone knows that the best way to give bullshit is to make unfounded claims that it's "statistical evidence."Dylar said:
Call me old fashioned, but I stand firm that the age of consent should be 18. Sex is serious buisness, which can have very serious results ranging from STDs to child-birth. Most individuals below the age of 18 are not equipped to handle these effects, neither emotionally or monetarily. In the States, atleast, most individuals under the age of 18 are still in school. Not a healthy environment to raise a child.
Furthermore, I know a wealth of people well over this age which I do not believe should EVER, I repeat, EVER have sex. Saddly, it's harder to write laws aimed at an individuals intelligence, appearence, or morals. Bastards...
Furthermore, I know a wealth of people well over this age which I do not believe should EVER, I repeat, EVER have sex. Saddly, it's harder to write laws aimed at an individuals intelligence, appearence, or morals. Bastards...
In my opinion, the age of consent should be the age that the society they live in considers them to be legally an adult. For the USA, it's currently 18 to be a legal adult. Why? Because if you are going to have a child (and that's what sex is for, no matter the other stuff), you need to be able to support the child. You will not be able to successfully raise a child by yourself if you are not able to get a job, rent some shelter, and make use of credit for emergencies (if you want to argue that others can support both, then that needs to be included into the age of consent).
TL
R = You wanna have sex? You better be old enough to support you and it by yourself.
TL
R = You wanna have sex? You better be old enough to support you and it by yourself.
Heares a thought.
2 13 year old have sex, 30 years later the boy looks back and has the memory of fucking a 13 year old.
Think about it a little.
2 13 year old have sex, 30 years later the boy looks back and has the memory of fucking a 13 year old.
Think about it a little.
In Washington it 16 or with-in 5 years, so a 16 year old can have sex with anyone 11 or older but a 15 year old only can have sex with people 10-20 years of age. Personally this seems kind of lenient but at least it means that if you get arrested for statutory rape here its because you deserve it not because you had sex with someone your own age.
Age of consent isn't about kids sleeping with kids but of adults sleeping with kids. Age of consent is one of the things that helps the law in figuring out what is rape or sexual assault. under what conditions.
OK.uncle-ellis said:
I can only do 14yo and 17 years later...it was a lot of fun, I'm glad I did it and I was probably rubbish at it. What was your point?
The age of consent laws aren't in place to prevent teenagers from having sex, though I'm sure some very right winged judges would like to make it out that way. The laws are in place very simply to protect little girls. Girls just reaching maturity tend to look at much older men as attractive, say, the 18-30 range. These young girls may think it's ok to bang men 8 to 15 years older than they are, but we all know that any 21 year old man who fucks a 13 year old girl is a scumbag, the fact is the 13 year old girl won't see it like that. Chances are, if he's willing to take advantage of a young teenage girl like that he's probably eventually if not already willing to take advantage of girls even younger. I remember when I was in high school and I knew some girls who were dating college aged men when they were in the 10th year, they thought that was so swanky, but now that I'm a college aged man I don't know any of my peers that wouldn't frown upon trying to pick up high school girls, it's all relative.
Legal consent age to have sex.
A legal consent age is like a line that isn't to be crossed. If the age of consent is 18, someone 18 or older cannot have sex with someone 17 or younger. It has nothing to do with two people 17 or younger having sex or two people 18 or older having sex.
That said, i think it should be more like "for persons under X age, they cannot have sex with a person Y years older than them". That is more the point. Even if you think that a person 13 years of age is mature enough to determine that they want to have sex, it is possible for someone in their twenties to manipulate them into having sex. For me, X would be 18, and Y would be 3.
As for the hypothetical age "below which you cannot have sex", whatever the age where you are allowed to enter the workforce full time. While you could still determine whether or not you want to have sex at any age puberty+, you can get pregnant at any point even with protection, and that is a burden that your parents shouldn't be forced to deal with.
A legal consent age is like a line that isn't to be crossed. If the age of consent is 18, someone 18 or older cannot have sex with someone 17 or younger. It has nothing to do with two people 17 or younger having sex or two people 18 or older having sex.
That said, i think it should be more like "for persons under X age, they cannot have sex with a person Y years older than them". That is more the point. Even if you think that a person 13 years of age is mature enough to determine that they want to have sex, it is possible for someone in their twenties to manipulate them into having sex. For me, X would be 18, and Y would be 3.
As for the hypothetical age "below which you cannot have sex", whatever the age where you are allowed to enter the workforce full time. While you could still determine whether or not you want to have sex at any age puberty+, you can get pregnant at any point even with protection, and that is a burden that your parents shouldn't be forced to deal with.