The age of consent ...(sex)

[Raven's Nest]

So, in the world there are different laws about how old you have to be before you can give consent to having sex. As in what age is it legal for you to have sex.

In the UK it's 16

In the US mostly it's 18 right?

What are the differences in other countries and how do you feel this reflects on your country?

Do you agree with the laws in your country? Or do you feel that they should be higher or lower? If so, why?

Would you find the idea of me having sex with a 16 year old repulsive and/or peadophillic? If so, why?

Another point is that it is illegal to have gay sex until you are 18 in the UK (I think?). Is that fair?

Keyword is maturity with this topic guys...

 

[fix-the-spade]

Another point is that it is illegal to have gay sex until you are 18 in the UK (I think?). Is that fair?

That changed a few years ago, it's 16 across the board now.


Anyway, I think it stems more from education and maturity than pure age. I'm quite hapy with it being 16 here in Englandland but havin said that I can think of plenty of people who should never be allowed to have sex, ever.


Provided that by the age of consent they know the science and the social sides of it (at least well enough to not go in unprotected) then any will do. What bugs me is avoiding sex education in younger kids, all the places in Europe with low teen preg rates start sex ed young. Us and America start it late and have high rates.

 

[cuddly_tomato]

I first had it a few years short of legal age with a lady who was much, much older, and although it was scary as hell it didn't do me any harm.

Across most of the EU it is 15 I think. I personally think that each case needs to be taken on its own merits, I don't see anything wrong with a mature 15 year old having sex if he or she knows what she is doing. I have problems with immature 19 year olds acting like whores (male or female variants) and spreading STDs/kids all over the place.

 

[Julianking93]

I don't think there should be an age of consent.

The age of consent doesn't make any difference. If people are gonna fuck, they're gonna fuck no matter what the law says.

People say that "The age of consent cuts down on rapes" Oh, fuck off! A rapist isn't gonna give a shit what the law says. He's already gonna rape someone, he's not gonna be like, "Oh, your just 17, I shouldn't rape you today."

 

[faceless chick]

18 here, doesn't matter, most people have sex before they're 16 anyway.
It's not legal but who cares..as long as it's not a result or rape/other legal problems, it's ok.

 

[ProfessorLayton]

I don't think there should be an age of consent.

The age of consent doesn't make any difference. If people are gonna fuck, they're gonna fuck no matter what the law says.

People say that "The age of consent cuts down on rapes" Oh, fuck off! A rapist isn't gonna give a shit what the law says. He's already gonna rape someone, he's not gonna be like, "Oh, your just 17, I shouldn't rape you today."

Almost exactly what I was going to say. In no way does it cut down on rape at all. Isn't it technically rape to be like 19 and have sex with a 17 year old or something? I'm not completely sure of the exact laws but still there is no good reason to have a law on this.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

The age is 15 here. Gotta love that government of ours.

 

[Raven's Nest]

18 here, doesn't matter, most people have sex before they're 16 anyway.
It's not legal but who cares..as long as it's not a result or rape/other legal problems, it's ok.

What about statutory rape?

Does this exist in your country? It would mean that, say I had sex with a 15 year old, I would be liable to be charged with statutory rape as the girl would have been under the age of consent. I would be jailed, put on the sex offenders list and branded a pedophile for the rest of my life...

Would it be worth it?...

Depends...

 

[Valate_v1legacy]

Another point is that it is illegal to have gay sex until you are 18 in the UK (I think?). Is that fair?

That changed a few years ago, it's 16 across the board now.


Anyway, I think it stems more from education and maturity than pure age. I'm quite hapy with it being 16 here in Englandland but havin said that I can think of plenty of people who should never be allowed to have sex, ever.


Provided that by the age of consent they know the science and the social sides of it (at least well enough to not go in unprotected) then any will do. What bugs me is avoiding sex education in younger kids, all the places in Europe with low teen preg rates start sex ed young. Us and America start it late and have high rates.

It's like 1/10 girls at my High School... Go team America? Whatever.

 

[PureChaos]

depends on their maturity, an younger person can have a much better understanding of sec and the consequences than someone older

 

[Lord George]

I don't think there should be an age of consent.

The age of consent doesn't make any difference. If people are gonna fuck, they're gonna fuck no matter what the law says.

People say that "The age of consent cuts down on rapes" Oh, fuck off! A rapist isn't gonna give a shit what the law says. He's already gonna rape someone, he's not gonna be like, "Oh, your just 17, I shouldn't rape you today."

Ahh but then you have the whole paedophilia thing, which is what the age of consent is meant to protect against, because a 40 year old man could easily claim that he got consent from a 6 year old and legally it would all be fine and dandy. Still I think the age of 16 is fine, people who are younger then that and consenting will get on with it anyway (its not like either of thems going to tell the police) but it prevents weird child sex crap.

 

[faceless chick]

18 here, doesn't matter, most people have sex before they're 16 anyway.
It's not legal but who cares..as long as it's not a result or rape/other legal problems, it's ok.

What about statutory rape?

Does this exist in your country? It would mean that say I had sex with a 15 year old, I would be liable to be charged with statutory rape as the girl would have been under the age of consent. I would be jailed, put on the sex offenders list and branded a peadophile for the rest of my life...

Would it be worth it?...

Depends...

Of course, legally you would be charged with pedophilia, but like I said, if she had sex willingly with you and didn't complain to the authorities, you don't have a problem.

The real problem comes when underage girls don't use protection..which is a lot of them, considering we have sex education at the age of 14 AND 16. -_-

 

[Aqualung]

From Canada's Department of Justice site:

The age of consent is 18 years where the sexual activity involves exploitative activity, such as prostitution, pornography or where there is a relationship of trust, authority or dependency. For other sexual activity, the age of consent is 14 years.

The Criminal Code provides what is often referred to as a "close in age" or "peer group" exception: a 12 or 13 year old can consent to engage in sexual activity with another person who is less than two years older and with whom there is no relationship of trust, authority or dependency.

Interesting.

And I do find it a bit odd, you having sex with someone who is 16. And you're 22, non? 6 years... That's too big an age gap, personally.

 

[cuddly_tomato]

Depends...

That would also depend on the judiciary in the place where you commited the "crime".

Read an old thread of mine [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.102954?page=1] for clarification on how stupid this area can get.

 

[Vault boy Eddie]

In the dominican republic its legal to have sex with a 14 yr old, yet they catch you with marijuana and its almost as bad as murder there, legaly speaking.

 

[Julianking93]

I don't think there should be an age of consent.

The age of consent doesn't make any difference. If people are gonna fuck, they're gonna fuck no matter what the law says.

People say that "The age of consent cuts down on rapes" Oh, fuck off! A rapist isn't gonna give a shit what the law says. He's already gonna rape someone, he's not gonna be like, "Oh, your just 17, I shouldn't rape you today."

Ahh but then you have the whole paedophilia thing, which is what the age of consent is meant to protect against, because a 40 year old man could easily claim that he got consent from a 6 year old and legally it would all be fine and dandy. Still I think the age of 16 is fine, people who are younger then that and consenting will get on with it anyway (its not like either of thems going to tell the police) but it prevents weird child sex crap.

Yes, but wouldn't that go under the catiegory of rape? He's not gonna care what the law says. True, there should be something to prevent against that.

How about, the legal age of consent is when you have the ability to reproduce?

 

[skywalkerlion]

Being I couldn't care less about sex, I don't really mind. But I do actually think 16 is pushing it, and it does seem pedo-lific to me.

 

[Serge A. Storms]

In the U.S., the only acceptable form of sex education in public school systems is total abstinence, which essentially means that if you fall somewhere between 9 and 18 in the U.S., sex will be portrayed as bad and "dirty" by your school system and awesome and without any consequences by fellow students. This makes the age of consent an utterly useless "moral stance" that politicians ride on for votes, just like being against gay marriage and for keeping "under God" on money. The age of consent is only there right now because it's easier to call everyone that has sex with a minor a pedophile than it is to attempt challenging the current system if you're trying to get elected to a public office.

EDIT: As far as actual rape goes, the courts should be capable of figuring out if the sex was consensual if the case makes it to trial (the bigger issue, of course, is getting rape cases to trial, something that the age of consent doesn't do anything to help). The age of consent simply draws an arbitrary line between what should be considered "statutory rape" and what is simply a young person fucking.