Different legal age limits for females and males?

[JJM 777]

This sub-forum is labelled as "All issues regarding sexism and the fight against it". This sounds like a presumption that all sexism should be "fought against". Sounds like a good (or very bad) place to explain my theory about legal age limits, and age differences in the schooling system.

Women typically prefer dating with men who are slightly (but not very much) older than themselves. Maybe this preference begins in teenage, as girls are a year or two ahead of boys in their physical puberty (as average, with great individual variance), and romantically prefer one or two years older boys, who are at the same level of puberty.

This phenomenon is so prevalent that many countries have different age limits for boys and girls to get married. Some countries have 17 years age limit for girls to get married, and 18 for boys. In some countries the difference in age limit is 2 or 3 years.

In most countries the age limit is 18 for both genders, but it is practically not perfectly useful, as a typical young man turns 18 and is able and willing to marry, but his typically 1 or 2 years younger girlfriend, at equal stage of puberty with him, is not legally able to marry yet. So this is the practical reason why many countries have set a lower age limit for girls to marry.

This is "sexism", and in my opinion it is very useful. I like this arrangement. My vote is that the legal age limit for women to get married should be one year lower than the age limit for men.

---

As I mentioned afore, in our schooling system the girls typically are romantically interested in boys of the next one or two higher classes. Socially it would be a more practical arrangement to have girls study in the same class with boys of the next higher class. In other words: Girls should enter the schooling system at one year younger age than boys. The two most reasonable options for entering the first class of elementary school would be:

- girls at 6 years of age, boys at 7 years of age
or
- girls at 7 years of age, boys at 8 years of age

... as freely chosen by the parents of the child, also considering the development stage of each individual.

This is "sexism" too, and in my opinion it would be socially very useful and enjoyable, as these peer groups enter High School age.

---

Now that we got started, I just quickly mention some other circumstances where I wish that the society would use strict separation of the sexes -- is it "sexism" then, I don't know.

- Sports competitions should be arranged separately for men and women, because of the virtual impossiblity of women to successfully compete against men in most types of sports. Public media attention should not be biased in favour of men's sports as it nowadays is, though. And some sports can be reasonably played with mixed teams, for example tennis and golf.

- Public saunas, toilets, showers etc. should mostly be reserved for one gender and banned from the other gender, unless there is public demand also for mixed-audience facilities. In that case, there would be three options to choose from: men only, women only, and mixed.

- The same applies to professions where nudity is routinely involved, but the general mainstream population is not following a nudistic lifestyle. For example in medical treatment of intimate nature, such as gynecology or urology, the default expectation of the state (in a non-nudistic culture) should be that the patient has the right to receive treatment exclusively from medical professionals of his/her own gender. Thus a midwife and obstetrician would be professions mainly reserved for women, for example.

[9]

This sub-forum is labelled as "All issues regarding sexism and the fight against it". This sounds like a presumption that all sexism should be "fought against". Sounds like a good (or very bad) place to explain my theory about legal age limits, and age differences in the schooling system.

Women typically prefer dating with men who are slightly (but not very much) older than themselves. Maybe this preference begins in teenage, as girls are a year or two ahead of boys in their physical puberty (as average, with great individual variance), and romantically prefer one or two years older boys, who are at the same level of puberty.

This phenomenon is so prevalent that many countries have different age limits for boys and girls to get married. Some countries have 17 years age limit for girls to get married, and 18 for boys. In some countries the difference in age limit is 2 or 3 years.

In most countries the age limit is 18 for both genders, but it is practically not perfectly useful, as a typical young man turns 18 and is able and willing to marry, but his typically 1 or 2 years younger girlfriend, at equal stage of puberty with him, is not legally able to marry yet. So this is the practical reason why many countries have set a lower age limit for girls to marry.

This is "sexism", and in my opinion it is very useful. I like this arrangement. My vote is that the legal age limit for women to get married should be one year lower than the age limit for men.

---

As I mentioned afore, in our schooling system the girls typically are romantically interested in boys of the next one or two higher classes. Socially it would be a more practical arrangement to have girls study in the same class with boys of the next higher class.
And you proceed yet further into incoherence:


In other words: Girls should enter the schooling system at one year younger age than boys. The two most reasonable options for entering the first class of elementary school would be:

- girls at 6 years of age, boys at 7 years of age
or
- girls at 7 years of age, boys at 8 years of age


So wait... let me get this straight. Your initial statements that "girls are largely attracted to boys multiple years older" (btw, citation for that one please) and that females reach sexual maturation earlier than their male counterparts has led you to the conclusions that.......... Girls should begin elementary school at age six, whereas boys should begin at age seven....?? Really? I fail to see why that is practical or relevant or anything short of absurd when the reasons you cite for it are:

1) sexual maturation (six and seven-year-olds, regardless of sex, are both several years away from even the beginning of puberty), and
2) the very dubious suggestion (again, I will definitely need a citation from you on this) that the significant majority of females are romantically attracted to older males.

What has either factor got to do with little children? Are you suggesting that the entire purpose of starting girls and boys in elementary school at different ages would be so that, by the time they are seeking romantic involvement (about at the time of high school), girls will systematically be in educational courses with older boys for the purpose of fostering romantic relationships?
So, in other words, we should restructure education and utilize what you consider "positive sexism" to ensure more efficient dating among students...?
Please.:rolleyes:



Now that we got started, I just quickly mention some other circumstances where I wish that the society would use strict separation of the sexes -- is it "sexism" then, I don't know.

- Sports competitions should be arranged separately for men and women, because of the virtual impossiblity of women to successfully compete against men in most types of sports. Public media attention should not be biased in favour of men's sports as it nowadays is, though. And some sports can be reasonably played with mixed teams, for example tennis and golf.

- Public saunas, toilets, showers etc. should mostly be reserved for one gender and banned from the other gender, unless there is public demand also for mixed-audience facilities. In that case, there would be three options to choose from: men only, women only, and mixed.

- The same applies to professions where nudity is routinely involved, but the general mainstream population is not following a nudistic lifestyle. For example in medical treatment of intimate nature, such as gynecology or urology, the default expectation of the state (in a non-nudistic culture) should be that the patient has the right to receive treatment exclusively from medical professionals of his/her own gender. Thus a midwife and obstetrician would be professions mainly reserved for women, for example.

Would I be incorrect to infer that your entire motive behind posting this is to seek provocation?

[red cat]

Both sexes have proved to be equal in the field of academics. So it would be wrong to set different ages for admission to schools. Also, typically reserving different areas of the same service for different sexes has its roots in the notion of private property, which depicts anyone belonging to the fairer sex as a commodity for her master.

[JJM 777]

2) the very dubious suggestion (again, I will definitely need a citation from you on this) that the significant majority of females are romantically attracted to older males.
Interesting if such a common and universal phenomenon can have skipped your attention through your entire life so far:

http://www.ssb.no/english/magazine/art-2005-01-31-01-en.html


Are you suggesting that the entire purpose of starting girls and boys in elementary school at different ages would be so that, by the time they are seeking romantic involvement (about at the time of high school), girls will systematically be in educational courses with older boys for the purpose of fostering romantic relationships?
Exactly. If a one year difference is to be arranged, it is socially more comfortable to arrange it smoothly with different ages of entering the schooling system (or boys doing one extra class of something before 1st class at school), rather than breaking the long-lasting friendships in a social schoolclass near high school age, by separating girls from boys and sending boys to one year extra class learning something else (professional studies for example), while girls move directly to the next one year older class of boys, now quite complete strangers to them.

[Revy]

What nonsense.
Why hasn't this sexist weirdo been restricted yet? "Liberal Totalitarianist"? :blink:

[9]

Interesting if such a common and universal phenomenon can have skipped your attention through your entire life so far:

http://www.ssb.no/english/magazine/art-2005-01-31-01-en.html


Exactly. If a one year difference is to be arranged, it is socially more comfortable to arrange it smoothly with different ages of entering the schooling system (or boys doing one extra class of something before 1st class at school), rather than breaking the long-lasting friendships in a social schoolclass near high school age, by separating girls from boys and sending boys to one year extra class learning something else (professional studies for example), while girls move directly to the next one year older class of boys, now quite complete strangers to them.

Why should education have any role in encouraging romantic relationships between teenagers? Let alone be restructured entirely for these ends. I don't see why it should be of any importance at all that males and females are placed in education courses together based on their sexual compatibility with one another for the purpose of fostering romantic involvement. It is not as if there's some sort of "teenagers aren't hooking up enough!" epidemic.
But then again, I really don't believe that you started this thread for any other reason then to provoke a reaction because what you are suggesting is simply too outlandish to be believable.

[JJM 777]

You seem to have something against the idea that teenagers would have a happy and active social life with the opposite gender of their most preferred age. Also you seem to underestimate the role of romantic happiness in the total happiness of people.

No "restructuring" of anything is necessary. Children already do enter the schooling system at varying age, according to decision made by the parents (one year sooner or later). Also different countries have different age for entering the schooling system, some have 7 years, some 6 years. So there is nothing "outlandish" in the fact that some children enter the schooling system at a different age than some others.

How about: ask the teenagers themselves?

[gorillafuck]

You seem to have something against the idea that teenagers would have a happy and active social life with the opposite gender of their most preferred age. Also you seem to underestimate the role of romantic happiness in the total happiness of people.
You suggested putting girls into school at 6 years old and boys into school at 7 years old for the purpose of having girls have boys a year older than them when they start dating.

That's ridiculous. If girls want to be in relationships with boys about a year older than them then they can do that perfectly well even if they are a grade lower.

[JJM 777]

Yep but such an arrangement includes discontinuous leap years, at the beginning and end of high school:

- when girls are in 6th grade of elementary school, while their dream boys are in 1st grade of high school in a different building on the other side of the town

- when girls are in last grade of high school, while their dream boys are in 1st grade of higher education in a different building on the other side of the town

The social arrangement that I suggest flows smoothly from start to end, without leap years of discontinuity.

[gorillafuck]

Yep but such an arrangement includes discontinuous leap years, at the beginning and end of high school:

- when girls are in 6th grade of elementary school, while their dream boys are in 1st grade of high school in a different building on the other side of the town

- when girls are in last grade of high school, while their dream boys are in 1st grade of higher education in a different building on the other side of the town

The social arrangement that I suggest flows smoothly from start to end, without leap years of discontinuity.
What about girls who like boys exactly their age? When the girl is in higher education, her boyfriend that is her age is still a senior in high school.

[Invincible Summer]

Yep but such an arrangement includes discontinuous leap years, at the beginning and end of high school:

- when girls are in 6th grade of elementary school, while their dream boys are in 1st grade of high school in a different building on the other side of the town

- when girls are in last grade of high school, while their dream boys are in 1st grade of higher education in a different building on the other side of the town



How is this an issue that is worthy of attention, especially for radical leftists? Communism (let alone "progressive values") isn't a solution for "girl-having-older-boyfriend-who-has-to-be-farther-away-for-school."

The girl(s) in both your proposed situations would have to deal with it - it's a by-product of their relationship.

Besides, reducing the marrying age for girls and leaving it the same for boys opens up a whole can of worms - girls generally mature earlier than boys, yes, but at the same time, if they're infatuated with an older guy, they could potentially be manipulated by them into doing things they wouldn't want to do at their age.

[Red Saxon]

In the perfect communistic society, there would be the community whore. :laugh:

[bcbm]

In the perfect communistic society, there would be the community whore. :laugh:

this isn't a funny thing at all to say, and in this forum? why don't you fuck off

[Red Saxon]

Oh my god, Who put the crab in your arse?

[bcbm]

i'm sorry, i don't find jokes about sexual slavery particularly stimulating or appropriate for a revolutionary leftist site, especially in a section called "women's struggle" given the situation of millions of women and girls worldwide who are forced to sell their body to survive.

[KarlMarx1989]

I think that in every society (especially in most European societies) sex isn't much of a problem at all. I think that all children should be admitted into school at the same age because they are all humans. It's not like they are different animals [mammals] or anything...

[JJM 777]

girls generally mature earlier than boys, yes, but at the same time, if they're infatuated with an older guy, they could potentially be manipulated by them into doing things they wouldn't want to do at their age.
Ehm, if you mean sex, the general assumption is that girls will want even more sex when they are older, not less.

By the way, I mentioned ages 17 and 18 as examples of marriage ages in some countries, but in the various polls on this forum much lower age limits have been suggested, somewhere around 12/13 years. Which also is my personal opinion for the legal age to marry. I just would like to ensure that effective contraception will be used until 18 years of age.


What about girls who like boys exactly their age? When the girl is in higher education, her boyfriend that is her age is still a senior in high school.
Every standard solution offered by the state usually serves the most typical mainstream group, and individuals differing from the average usually experience less ideal circumstances than average persons. But even then, optimizing the system for average persons is useful for everyone, because it also minimizes the average distance from average by non-average persons.

[jake williams]

It's like being two kinds of reactionary at once!

[Le Libérer]

In the perfect communistic society, there would be the community whore. :laugh:Consider this a verbal warning for sexism. Anymore of it, You'll be owning a warning point.

[TC]

The women's forum is not an appropriate place for a predominantly male group todiscuss someone's sexist speculations about how descrimination against women can be restored. The sexist topic starter is right in thinking that as leftists, we do presume that all sexism should be faught against. Moved to opposing ideologies.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

I probably shouldn't even bother with this, but somehow, I feel the urge to address some of the ridiculous fallacies here...


Women typically prefer dating with men who are slightly (but not very much) older than themselves. Maybe this preference begins in teenage, as girls are a year or two ahead of boys in their physical puberty (as average, with great individual variance), and romantically prefer one or two years older boys, who are at the same level of puberty.

This phenomenon is so prevalent that many countries have different age limits for boys and girls to get married. Some countries have 17 years age limit for girls to get married, and 18 for boys. In some countries the difference in age limit is 2 or 3 years.

In most countries the age limit is 18 for both genders, but it is practically not perfectly useful, as a typical young man turns 18 and is able and willing to marry, but his typically 1 or 2 years younger girlfriend, at equal stage of puberty with him, is not legally able to marry yet. So this is the practical reason why many countries have set a lower age limit for girls to marry.

This is "sexism", and in my opinion it is very useful. I like this arrangement. My vote is that the legal age limit for women to get married should be one year lower than the age limit for men.

http://jtechama.com/pictures/ploggerb3/thumbs/lrg-242-picard-facepalm.jpg

Ok, this kind of thinking is something called essentialism: The belief that if you observe a certain feature in a large number of people of a certain category (for example, women), then this feature must be due to some inherent or essential characteristics of the category of people in question. In other words, if women do something, it's because they are women. If black people do something, it's because they are black. If teenagers do something, it's because they are teenagers. If red-haired people do something, it's because they are red-haired people.

It is a fallacy, and a particularly dangerous one, because it lies at the heart of such things as nationalism, racism, sexism, and prejudice against various groups of people in general.

To demonstrate why this kind of thinking is wrong, I will give you a few examples of essentialist logic along with the reason why they are false:

Women tend to have longer hair than men. Therefore female hair grows faster than male hair.
False. Women tend to have longer hair than men because that is the prevailing fashion in our society, not because their hair grows faster.

Men and women tend to find people with tanned skin more attractive. Therefore humans are inherently attracted to tanned skin.
False. Criteria for attractiveness are socially determined. In 16th century Europe, for example, having very pale skin was considered attractive - so much so that it was common for one to lose lead-based powder to make one's skin paler by poisoning it.

The United States has a very high rate of obesity. Therefore Americans have a genetic defect that makes them fat.
False. The high rate of obesity in the US is due to differences in food, not differences in the people who live there.

Do you see why it's also wrong to claim that women inherently prefer to have relationships with older men? All you have done is observe a certain behaviour (among a very small group of women, I might add). You have not really even tried to come up with a good explanation for it. You just assumed they do it because they are women. You have not looked into cultural, historical, social or economic factors. You have not taken into account the possibility that your observations are just a fluke or coincidence.

You can't just assume that people do what they do simply because of their gender (or skin colour, or hair colour, or nose length). You must first look at all other factors and see if they could be the cause of the behaviour you've observed.

[Module]

The reason that different legal age limits for women and men are 'widespread' is not because 'women are attracted to older men' (it would be, if anything, because men are attracted to younger women). There was, back in the day, no value in keeping a girl at home and educating her like there was a boy for whom it was possible to eventually earn a decent living and support the parents. The priority for girls was marrying them off, where their primary obligations would shift, instead, to the family of the husband, because of the exchange of formal or de facto ownership over her.
That's why there is/was a lower legal age of marriage for women.

[JJM 777]

In other words, if women do something, it's because they are women.
To the question, why teenage girls prefer a slightly (but not much) older boy as their partner, I gave as a biological explanation the more early onset of puberty in girls than boys. Teenagers are naturally attracted to the opposite gender who are at the same stage of puberty as they are themselves. This biological (not cultural) factor is what causes the preference of teenage girls to date with boys whose age is the girl's age plus 0...2 years, and the preference of teenage boys to date with a girl whose age is the boy's age minus 0...2 years.

At older age, socio-economic factors come into the picture (as well as the fact that men erotically prefer a woman as young and immaculate as possible, while women's romantic attachment is more to the personality than to the body), and the average age difference between spouses grows greater than it is in teenage.

Biological factors are difficult to change, and I would say: unwise to change. Cultural factors are possible to change, but trying to change a cultural habit is not usually the way of least resistance. If you have an agenda (I don't) to change the culture so that girls are no longer typically attracted to slightly older men, and vice versa, you would need some massive campaigning, you would meet a lot of resistance, and if you eventually succeeded in your campaign, would the end result be a more valuable culture than the original situation?

[danyboy27]

woha, this shit dosnt make sense at all.
men and women are different, this is true but geez, not THAT different.

i invite all my fellow OIer to reply to this thing, beccause i think this is the best way to describe this thread, a thing.

[Richard Nixon]

I'm a conservative but I think this is absolute nonsense. Even if some women prefer older men they can date afterschool or between classes or otherwise do it so it doesn't detract from school. This merely delays the female's education.

[NecroCommie]

Some of the underlying reasons for the OP are correct, yet the deductions from those sources have gone drastically wrong.

It is true that romantically teenage girls are attracted to older boys, that is at least if we go by the poll put forth at my high school. Also, this study seems to support this finding --> http://www.eioba.com/a70149/how_men_select_women It's an interesting read in other ways too, check it out.

This however is not anykind of reason to change ages of maturity. This goes especially when the legal age limits are inaccurate to begin with. I am not trying to claim that the age limits are useless (like some anarchists), but I do acknowledge the poor practical value of tinkering with those limits.

Also, as said before, biological and romantic attraction should not play any role on how we choose the mature citizens.


Both sexes have proved to be equal in the field of academics.
Not true, vast majority of academics in finland are women. Not only that, but girls by average score better in high-school than boys, and I believe everyone has personal experiences on this. Ironically, this does not mean that women get employed more often, or to better places.

This however, is a cultural matter in my oppinion. So if you meant that there are no differences on biological level then I agree.

[JJM 777]

This merely delays the female's education.
Actually the opposite, you may have read it carelessly: it delays males' education by one year compared to females.


the deductions from those sources have gone drastically wrong.
(...)
This however is not anykind of reason to change ages of maturity.
(...)
vast majority of academics in finland are women. Not only that, but girls by average score better in high-school than boys
Thank you for supplying evidence that females mature a bit earlier than males, and perform better at school than males. Also there have been reports that school teachers give preferential grades to boys in Finnish elementary school, because they don't want to give as low grades to them as they would deserve according to the true level of their performance in exams.

=>

My suggestion would correct this problem, if males enter the schooling system one year older than females: it would mean that males catch up the average maturity gap that now exists between males and females of the same school class. Two flies killed with the same very simple hit: the romantic/sexual maturity gap and the academic maturity gap leveled out.

[Richard Nixon]

Actually the opposite, you may have read it carelessly: it delays males' education by one year compared to females.




Why should I be forced to delay my education for a year? I'm not even interested in dating girls right now and even if you are you can do it afterschool or some other time.

[NecroCommie]

My suggestion would correct this problem, if males enter the schooling system one year older than females: it would mean that males catch up the average maturity gap that now exists between males and females of the same school class. Two flies killed with the same very simple hit: the romantic/sexual maturity gap and the academic maturity gap leveled out.
Your suggestion would be more than fine provided that the root of te proble were biological. As it happens, I believe it is cultural in nature. Alpha-boys in schools are not expected to be "nerds". Learning is not considered to be cool, instead you get friends by telling good jokes and showing off your physical fitness. Also, rebelling towards teachers is seen as brave no matter how illogical it may be, and punishments are received as proofs of "coolness".

If such reactionary phenomenons were to be removed from the culture of young boys, the academic gap between the sexes would significantly decrease.