How do you feel about age of consent laws?

[ContrarianLemming]

ergo, age where you can legally have sex with anyone

I support that Canadian "it's more important how close the ages are" idea, I'm not saying it originates there, just that it's the first country that comes to ming if I'm correct.

[M-26-7]

Age of consent is a concept derived from Catholicism (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01209a.htm), so basically, I do not see how any leftist can ascribe to it. It requires a profoundly condescending and reactionary view of young people to say that they are not sexually "mature", or that they are not intelligent enough to consent to a relationship with someone much older (or the same age). If a 13-year-old is legally able to consent to a relationship with another 13-year-old, for instance, then only the most blatant, illogical, double standard can hold that they are somehow unable to consent to a relationship when the other person is 33, 43, etc. It's the same young person doing the consenting in both cases. Either a person can consent, or s/he can't, and the age of the potential partner doesn't have any impact on that.

From my current perspective, I see this as a clear-cut issue of Children's Lib. I've struggled with and overcome my own reactionary views on this issue and I encourage others to do the same.

Personally, I think someone is able to consent as early as they can learn to write cursive. Consenting is not that hard and doesn't require some advanced intellect, it just required a consciousness of self and an ability to introspect about one's own inner desires. But I'm open for debate on the exact age.

[ContrarianLemming]

Age of consent is a concept derived from Catholicism (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01209a.htm), so basically, I do not see how any leftist can ascribe to it. It requires a profoundly condescending and reactionary view of young people to say that they are not sexually "mature", or that they are not intelligent enough to consent to a relationship with someone much older (or the same age). If a 13-year-old is legally able to consent to a relationship with another 13-year-old, for instance, then only the most blatant, illogical, double standard can hold that they are somehow unable to consent to a relationship when the other person is 33, 43, etc. It's the same young person doing the consenting in both cases. Either a person can consent, or s/he can't, and the age of the potential partner doesn't have any impact on that.


Actually it does, it has a huge impact in power inbalance and coercion, it's simply not an equal relationship and age of consent does not derive from catholicism, it's far older.
To be frank, it is very easy to manipulate a teen.

[Jack]

Why isn't advocating pedophilia banned?

[M-26-7]

Why isn't advocating pedophilia banned?

Why isn't advocating children's sexual oppression banned, hypocrite?

Let me ask you one thing: what is the difference between you and a fascist when it comes to your views on child sexuality?

[Os Cangaceiros]

This thread will end in flames.

[meow]

i love age of consent laws. but current ones dont go far enough. i think everyone under the age of 70 cant consent and anyone who has sex with anyone under 70 should be locked up for life.

[Jack]

Why isn't advocating children's sexual oppression banned, hypocrite?

Let me ask you one thing: what is the difference between you and a fascist when it comes to your views on child sexuality?

Alright, I don't fucking care if I get another infraction. Here's the way it fucking goes:


1. You have no fucking idea what you're talking about. You're probably some fucking 15/16 year old who thinks he's "grown up" (don't call ageism, I'm fucking 18) and understands the nature of sexual relations between adults and children. You don't, if you have a friend who's 16 and fucks some 27 year old (we've all had one), that 27 year old is still some fucking low life scum.

2. You've never fucking experienced ANYTHING like this. With all your bullshit justifications about "Childrens' Lib" (whatever the fuck that means), you still don't know what the fuck it means for a child or a teen to be taken advantage of. You don't know the pain or the emotional fucking trauma things like this cause, your fucking bullshit has directly affected me, my family, some of my fucking friends too. You will never understand what the fuck it's like.

3. You're fucking disguisting. Everything about you is revolting, regardless of your petty fucking arguments about "morality" or "freedom", the fact is you're still a fucking pervert. You and anyone who fucking touches a child or even a teen is in the same fucking category as a rapist.

Just shut the fuck up now.

[GreenCommunism]

hmph those threads always come back, seriously, how many people would we lose by stating what you just said m-26-7.

also, both side are just so stupid, i believe we are geared to prefer people of our own age and such couples last longer. i also believe there is too little girls for the number of boys until we reach 25.i also believe there are more pervs in this world than there are children. but i also believe that putting someone in jail for rape when there is no violence or coercition is an insult to actual rape victims. do they suffer post-traumatic stress?


Actually it does, it has a huge impact in power inbalance and coercion, it's simply not an equal relationship and age of consent does not derive from catholicism, it's far older.
To be frank, it is very easy to manipulate a teen.

i agree,but you forgot all sex is rape too. by the way, how do you manipulate someone to have sex with them? that would be psychological abuse which is illegal. is manipulating so called flirting?

it is a version of catholicism, it has nothing to do with catholicism, but it is a version of 'sex is wrong no matter what', don't think with your brain and ask the victim, because it's automaticly wrong.

i would agree with extra-protection or even jail time, the problem is that people in society don't believe what children says to this day. we are now faced with a weird dilemna, nobody believes children, because they are 'stupid' children, so their words in court is not important. and you cannot have sexual relationships with children, because they are too young to consent, and too 'stupid' to tell you that they agree with such a relationship. conservatives want to put 14 year olds in jail, and we have to wonder if the other inmates will care about age of consent, so a 14 year old is responsible for murder, but not responsible for sex? after all, he should be punished just like the older person for having sex, since it is wrong, like go in your room kind of punishment. but they won't make this into being because rape victims are scared enough to speak out already. this is all a big headfuck.

[#FF0000]

The brain of a child is sort of way, way, way, way different than that of someone 18, let alone someone older than that.

tbh I don't see how anyone can say that relations like that could be consensual and non-exploitive or coercive.

[GreenCommunism]

1. You have no fucking idea what you're talking about. You're probably some fucking 15/16 year old who thinks he's "grown up" (don't call ageism, I'm fucking 18) and understands the nature of sexual relations between adults and children. You don't, if you have a friend who's 16 and fucks some 27 year old (we've all had one), that 27 year old is still some fucking low life scum.

better yet, he is a creepy old man. also, this is another bullshit i hate from pseudo-leftist, those who rape children almost all had extremely painful childhood, often including child sexual abuse in 58% of the child molesters. since this is a different crime and our justice system is so fucking useless, nobody seems to give a fuck about that. there is no mention of prevention or investing in non sexual abuse child protection agencies. all there is are shows like to catch a predator so we can all laugh the fuck out at the most evil type of criminal there ever existed. an hypocritical show that targets one of the softest child molesters and will never spend a fucking penny on child protection agencies, all pure profits.


2. You've never fucking experienced ANYTHING like this. With all your bullshit justifications about "Childrens' Lib" (whatever the fuck that means), you still don't know what the fuck it means for a child or a teen to be taken advantage of. You don't know the pain or the emotional fucking trauma things like this cause, your fucking bullshit has directly affected me, my family, some of my fucking friends too. You will never understand what the fuck it's like.

please tell us what you have experienced. this is all bullshit to me, someone in your family was raped and you call this being taken advantage of as opposed to being fucking raped. yes i agree that all this child liberation shit is nonsense, but i call bullshit on you.

[GreenCommunism]

I support that Canadian "it's more important how close the ages are" idea, I'm not saying it originates there, just that it's the first country that comes to ming if I'm correct.

canadian laws also prohibit anal sex with those under 18. which is in my opinion a very good thing.

[Jack]

please tell us what you have experienced. this is all bullshit to me, someone in your family was raped and you call this being taken advantage of as opposed to being fucking raped. yes i agree that all this child liberation shit is nonsense, but i call bullshit on you.

Fuck you.

[TwoSevensClash]

Age of consent is a concept derived from Catholicism (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01209a.htm), so basically, I do not see how any leftist can ascribe to it. It requires a profoundly condescending and reactionary view of young people to say that they are not sexually "mature", or that they are not intelligent enough to consent to a relationship with someone much older (or the same age). If a 13-year-old is legally able to consent to a relationship with another 13-year-old, for instance, then only the most blatant, illogical, double standard can hold that they are somehow unable to consent to a relationship when the other person is 33, 43, etc. It's the same young person doing the consenting in both cases. Either a person can consent, or s/he can't, and the age of the potential partner doesn't have any impact on that.

From my current perspective, I see this as a clear-cut issue of Children's Lib. I've struggled with and overcome my own reactionary views on this issue and I encourage others to do the same.

Personally, I think someone is able to consent as early as they can learn to write cursive. Consenting is not that hard and doesn't require some advanced intellect, it just required a consciousness of self and an ability to introspect about one's own inner desires. But I'm open for debate on the exact age.
If you walked in on your 10 year old having sex with a 35 year old you would be singing a different tune.

[M-26-7]

Jack and TwoSevensClash, I see your points, both of you. And I actually agree. I've changed my mind again.

Fuck pedophiles.

[M-26-7]

And on a completely unrelated note, fuck The Anarchist Tension.

[meow]

of course if you think about it. there is not "one point" for maturity. so to say that people 15 are different from people 18 is over generalize. some people 13 are more mature then some people 18. or 21.

oh yeah and i just want to say something i said last time this came up. meaningful consent is the most important thing. and i will say no more.

[meow]

and on a completely unrelated note i think this thread should be locked because of the trolls such as m 26 7

[M-26-7]

Guys, for fuck's sake, we don't have to criticize everything about bourgeois society. It doesn't make us better anarchist/communist/whatever to do this.

I think 18 is about right for age of consent. I like the current laws. They could be tweaked in small ways to improve them, but I don't want some sick pervert 30-year-olds going around touching pre-teens. All in all these laws are a necessary safeguard and I wouldn't change them in a post-revolutionary society.

Let's face it; bourgeois society does some things right. It makes pretty good pizza. The internet is a pretty cool thing. And maybe, just maybe, age of consent laws are OK too.

I wish others here were big enough to admit when they've had an honest change of opinion, as I am. It is fucking sick that anyone would sit here and defend this pedophile shit while Jack has just shared his personal trauma from such an experience touching his family.

[The Feral Underclass]

Why isn't advocating pedophilia banned?

It is, and rightly so. But what no one in this thread is actually talking about paedophilia. Paedophilia is a psychological condition that compels a person to have sexual desires towards pre-pubescent children. No one in this thread is talking about that, as far as I can see.

[The Feral Underclass]

If you walked in on your 10 year old having sex with a 35 year old you would be singing a different tune.

But a 10 year old can't consent to/enjoy sex (since their bodies are not developed). Consenting to sex means understanding what it is, what it represents and what it feels like. A 10 year old can't really do that, since they can't experience an orgasm or really understand that that feeling is a motivating factor in having sex.

A 10 year old might be able to understand sex abstractly, but until you are able to fully understand it, then how can a 10 year old realistically consent?

[The Feral Underclass]

tbh I don't see how anyone can say that relations like that could be consensual and non-exploitive or coercive.

Well, we have to understand what consent is before we can say what is and what isn't consensual.

On the issue of exploitation. What do you mean by exploitation? Do you mean exploiting someone's body to get sexual gratification or something different?

[GreenCommunism]

Fuck you.

where's your friggin story? someone in your family was drunk and raped then you claim it has something to do with age difference, i'm curious to know why.



I wish others here were big enough to admit when they've had an honest change of opinion, as I am. It is fucking sick that anyone would sit here and defend this pedophile shit while Jack has just shared his personal trauma from such an experience touching his family.

we should also reject communism because of the sadness of a bourgeois who faced strikes, rly? if you can't hold to political opinions because of emotional arguments then you won't go far in this world.

you know let's face it, there are pedophiles on the internet posing as 13 years old who want to have sex with old mens just so it sounds acceptable to people. well i call bullshit on this guy because he doesn't seem legit , he is a 40 year old father concerned with the pro-pedophil crap on revleft, which i am very concerned about as well. he might be a mother too who cares.

we have no idea of the circumstances of such abuse, and we are supposed to accept everything he says without questioning it? he can go fuck himself, he's comparing violent rape to sexual relationship with an unfair power balance, and that's fucking offensive to me as someone who had within the family incestuous child sexual abuse under 11. i say the real problem are people who just assume that it was rape, i say we ask the young person whether the relationship was abusive or not . but people like jack think childrens are too fucking stupid to talk to.


And on a completely unrelated note, fuck The Anarchist Tension.

well his support for polanski kinda pissed me off.

[The Feral Underclass]

Erm. I never supported Polanski. Not ever.

But it's interesting that you are giving the same line on "questioning" stories of rape that I gave in the Polanski thread.

[GreenCommunism]

now i don't want to sound creepy, but can you create a children without having sexual pleasure? i heard that in very rare case there are children pregnant at 10 or 9. but hey thats fucking creepy and i consider those childrens to be monsters of nature.

[GreenCommunism]

Erm. I never supported Polanski. Not ever.

ah sorry man, i thought you sounded neutral on some of the stuff about him, you know how it's like, you're with us or against us. sorry again.

[Quail]

canadian laws also prohibit anal sex with those under 18. which is in my opinion a very good thing.

Why is that a very good thing? If anything, that law is homophobic.

I don't think there should be a set "age of consent". It depends on the circumstances. If a 14 year old and a 15 year old have sex, there's nothing wrong with that despite them both being under the age of consent in the UK. As long as someone understands what sex is, they can consent. In the case of 30 year olds having sex with teenagers, I think that is questionable because a 30 year old would have more experience and the power-balance would be off.

I hate how all these threads turn into flame wars where people call each other pedophiles. Come on, can we not have a civil, mature discussion about this?

[The Feral Underclass]

What is this power balance?

[Quail]

Someone with more experience is more likely to be able to manipulate the other person is what I meant. Sorry to bring my own experiences into the discussion, but the first guy that I went out with was older than me and had been with a lot of girls before me. He took advantage of me and my lack of experience with men.

[The Feral Underclass]

But that's not an age thing. That could happen with any one of age. Manipulation doesn't just happen to young people and it doesn't happen because someone is young. It happens because certain people are fucktards. I also think these problems are more likely to occur with young people because of the way they are taught about sex, which is a completely disempowering experience. If we taught young people to be more independent, to think more independently and be equipped with sensible advise and understandings, so they were more confident and well-rounded (not that you aren't :p) then chances of manipulation are reduced.

[GreenCommunism]

Why is that a very good thing? If anything, that law is homophobic.

well yeah i agree, i just thought that if there is any sort of sex between adults and minors then it shouldn't be buttsex, but then again what about homosexuality.

[GreenCommunism]

Someone with more experience is more likely to be able to manipulate the other person is what I meant. Sorry to bring my own experiences into the discussion, but the first guy that I went out with was older than me and had been with a lot of girls before me. He took advantage of me and my lack of experience with men.

But that's not an age thing. That could happen with any one of age. Manipulation doesn't just happen to young people and it doesn't happen because someone is young. It happens because certain people are fucktards.

i agree with both of you, again i will state the same thing, isn't it psychological abuse?

[eyedrop]

There are also a million different cases where "the power balance" is of where age isn't a factor. Consider a case where an employee has sex with a boss, a relationship where one part has control of the households money supply or any sexual encounter where one part can make decisions affecting the other partner.

To me it seems like the "power balance" is off in plenty of other sexual relationships, most notably the "housewife" one where the "housewife" is in reality fucked if the "working party" decides to leave.

[Quail]

But that's not an age thing. That could happen with any one of age. Manipulation doesn't just happen to young people and it doesn't happen because someone is young. It happens because certain people are fucktards. I also think these problems are more likely to occur with young people because of the way they are taught about sex, which is a completely disempowering experience. If we taught young people to be more independent, to think more independently and be equipped with sensible advise and understandings, so they were more confident and well-rounded (not that you aren't :p) then chances of manipulation are reduced.

Yeah, I suppose that's true, really. The sex education I received wasn't particularly good. However, a younger person is still developing their opinions and a sense of who they are (or, at least, more so than someone of 30) which I think can leave people a little more vulnerable. That's not to say that a 30 year old and a teenager can't have perfectly healthy, consensual sex, just that when I think about the people I knew from school who were involved with older partners, I think some of them were taken advantage of.

[Magón]

I think that if a 15 year old (whether male or female, doesn't matter to me) wants to have sex with a 20 year old (male or female, doesn't matter to me) then they should. IF they want to. I dated a chick who was 24 when I was 17. Sure she was a little crazy, but only until about a year of us dating.

Hell I knew a guy who in high school (I think his sophomore or Junior Year), started dating a 35 year old chick with two kids already. I didn't know him during high school, I never went to US high schools, but that's what they tell me. (Both of them, not just word of mouth people.)

I also say if you're 13 and consent to having sex with a 19 year old, go ahead. But they better have a good understanding of what they're getting into. For all ages, not just those hitting puberty. I've met some pretty dumb people in their 20s, who don't understand Sex, like I did when I was 14! So yeah, the two people just better understand what can come of their little sexual escapade.

[The Feral Underclass]

Yeah, I suppose that's true, really. The sex education I received wasn't particularly good. However, a younger person is still developing their opinions and a sense of who they are (or, at least, more so than someone of 30) which I think can leave people a little more vulnerable. That's not to say that a 30 year old and a teenager can't have perfectly healthy, consensual sex, just that when I think about the people I knew from school who were involved with older partners, I think some of them were taken advantage of.

They probably were taken advantage of, but the question is whether you restrict the rights of young people and maintain a standard of oppression (i.e. treat them as stupid people, incapable of thought), while refusing to educate them properly, or you equip them with the necessary tools not to be taken advantage of. Are we really going to say that we can't teach young people how to spot signs of manipulation. Young people aren't idiots, they're just treated badly.

[Quail]

They probably were taken advantage of, but the question is whether you restrict the rights of young people and maintain a standard of oppression (i.e. treat them as stupid people, incapable of thought), while refusing to educate them properly, or you equip them with the necessary tools not to be taken advantage of. Are we really going to say that we can't teach young people how to spot signs of manipulation. Young people aren't idiots, they're just treated badly.
I'm not saying that the rights of young people should be restricted at all. I don't think there should be a set "age of consent" as it's up to the people involved whether they're capable of giving consent. I think that there should be better sex education, and maybe some kind of relationship education (for want of a better way of expressing that). I don't think young people are idiots, but a lack of life experience could leave them more vulnerable, even if they have been given adequate sex education.

[TwoSevensClash]

But a 10 year old can't consent to/enjoy sex (since their bodies are not developed). Consenting to sex means understanding what it is, what it represents and what it feels like. A 10 year old can't really do that, since they can't experience an orgasm or really understand that that feeling is a motivating factor in having sex.

A 10 year old might be able to understand sex abstractly, but until you are able to fully understand it, then how can a 10 year old realistically consent?
He said he thought the age of consent should be when you can write cursive. I agree a ten year old can't consent.

[M-26-7]

But that's not an age thing. That could happen with any one of age. Manipulation doesn't just happen to young people and it doesn't happen because someone is young. It happens because certain people are fucktards.

I agree. Young people who are victimized by adult predators did not get manipulated because they are too young to know better, but because they are fucktards.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

Why isn't advocating children's sexual oppression banned, hypocrite?

Let me ask you one thing: what is the difference between you and a fascist when it comes to your views on child sexuality?
Paedophilia and child liberation are not the same thing.

A paedophile is somebody who has a sexual attraction to minors, and whether you like it or not, minors are still in development and are not able to understand sexual connotations - they are unable to consent to something that they do not have an objective concept of. And why should they have? They're tiny human beings that are growing mentally and physically.

They shouldn't be subjected to sex and we should protect developing people (and all people) from forced sexuality (which is what characterises most instances of paedophilia) until they are able to understand sexuality for themselves, through their own natural psychological and biological development.

As for the age of consent, all I will say on the matter is that children should be educated objectively about sexuality, and fully developed human beings should know better than to subject a developing child to sex.

Educate and guide children; let them find their own way. If you really want to liberate a child, you let them have free thought and freedom of education. This is not equal to accepting paedophiles, who disrupt the development of a child and violate their freedom, in the same way that a rapist disrupts the freedom of their victim. It is just not acceptable.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

hmph those threads always come back, seriously, how many people would we lose by stating what you just said m-26-7.

also, both side are just so stupid, i believe we are geared to prefer people of our own age and such couples last longer. i also believe there is too little girls for the number of boys until we reach 25.i also believe there are more pervs in this world than there are children. but i also believe that putting someone in jail for rape when there is no violence or coercition is an insult to actual rape victims. do they suffer post-traumatic stress?

I just want to say that someone very close to me was raped, in a 'non-violent' way, and she suffered very severe PTSD. Rape is a complex subject, we shouldn't ever question any man or woman's allegations on the subject, regardless of whether we think that the attacker was violent enough.

[Quail]

Coercion isn't necessarily physically violent. It can be emotional too, although I would probably call that emotional abuse as opposed to rape.

[Palingenisis]

I just want to say that someone very close to me was raped, in a 'non-violent' way, and she suffered very severe PTSD. Rape is a complex subject, we shouldn't ever question any man or woman's allegations on the subject, regardless of whether we think that the attacker was violent enough.

No it is not.

Rape is one of the worst things you can do to someone as anyone who has actually been raped or had a close friend/family member raped knows full well.

Giving in to a pushy guy or girl when you are drunk or stoned or whatever is far from being the same as actual rape.

Some crazy feminists have said that all sex under patriarchy is rape which is totally making a mockery of actual rape victims.

[M-26-7]

Coercion isn't necessarily physically violent. It can be emotional too, although I would probably call that emotional abuse as opposed to rape.

Also, I'd just like to point out that sometimes this emotional coercion leading to rape is really the fault of the so-called "victim", for being an easily manipulatable fucktard. And that goes even if the so-called "victim" is underage. I totally agree with TAT on this one.

[Nwoye]

Can we ban this guy yet? ^^^^

[khad]

But that's not an age thing. That could happen with any one of age. Manipulation doesn't just happen to young people and it doesn't happen because someone is young. It happens because certain people are fucktards.
:rolleyes:

I'm not gonna go there.

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

No it is not.

Rape is one of the worst things you can do to someone as anyone who has actually been raped or had a close friend/family member raped knows full well.

Giving in to a pushy guy or girl when you are drunk or stoned or whatever is far from being the same as actual rape.

Some crazy feminists have said that all sex under patriarchy is rape which is totally making a mockery of actual rape victims.
Rape is complex, and in the case of the person I know and love, the aftermath of the attack she dealt with and the affect on her life was one of the most devastating things I've ever witnessed, I can't imagine how hard it is for her or anyone who has been through the same.

What is 'pushy'? What if someone was being 'pushy' to somebody in a fragile state of mind, perhaps dealing with complex mental issues? And this 'pushiness' was personified by what could be described as psychological torture? Until the point of the actual use of force being minute but, at the same time, based on a lack of consent? Is the attacker with the knife being more pushy than is socially acceptable, if there is such a thing (which I hope there isn't)?

There are a world of scenarios that lead to these attacks, it is not always a woman walking through an alley being captured by an attacker with a knife. Sometimes it happens in the home, whilst the person is with the one they put their trust into. As I said, we should not shun any accusation, or generalise what rape is based on anything. It varies from case to case and is a very serious matter, that I feel is not taken seriously enough in many cases.

[M-26-7]

Can we ban this guy yet? ^^^^

I agree, ban TAT for saying this stupid shit.

[Quail]

Also, I'd just like to point out that sometimes this emotional coercion leading to rape is really the fault of the so-called "victim", for being an easily manipulatable fucktard. And that goes even if the so-called "victim" is underage. I totally agree with TAT on this one.
What the fuck? It's never anyone's own fault if they get raped, and you can't really blame someone for being vulnerable. Go fuck yourself.

[M-26-7]

What the fuck? It's never anyone's own fault if they get raped, and you can't really blame someone for being vulnerable. Go fuck yourself.

I was paraphrasing TAT's post from the previous page, Sherlock. Of course it is an idiotic opinion. But TAT is the one saying it.

[Crux]

canadian laws also prohibit anal sex with those under 18. which is in my opinion a very good thing.
Eh? Why? It's most likely just a left-over anti-sodomy/homosexuality law.

Also, just to pitch in when someone is under 17 age difference do matter and the authority, and experience, that comes with age, plus than the opposite traits in the -17 year old makes forms of cohesion rather likely. It's not about moralism, it's for the same reason a boss-employee relationship (nevermind the fucking the classenemy aspect) can be problematic. Authority. Now there are no perfect jurisdiction, and we shouldn't trick ourselves into believing that. The age of consent in sweden is 15, also, I am little fuzzy on the specifics, but if both are under 18 and the age difference is less than 3 years it is also legal, I believe. And I have no problem with that, because it is not a problem of jurisdiction.

[La Comédie Noire]

I think TAT was describing those who would take advantage of others sexually as "fucktards".

[Luisrah]

I don't really know how to give an opinion here.

On one side a teen can be easily manipulated etc... We all know the risks, some more than others.

However, there are conscious teens, informed about things. Not trying to sound all high, but I know about coercion, the importance of protecion, and have for quite a while. And last year (when I was 16) I liked someone who was 23 or something, and if it had gone somewhere, I maybe would have had sex with her.

This is around the same thing as road lights. What is more important is the red, saying that you can't move, or it is probable there will be an accident. But if you don't notice the green, it's better than not noticing the red.

It is more important here to prevent pedophilia than the situation I described above, although it would be better if both were possible. But how?

Parents giving consent for them? I don't know of any other way to make it ''legal''. :confused:

[28350]

Some crazy feminists have said that all sex under patriarchy is rape which is totally making a mockery of actual rape victims.
Maybe they got their words jumbled, and were trying to say all rape is sex.
Who knows.

Also, will I get infractions and shit for having "pædophile liberationist" as my user title (facetiously)?

[A Revolutionary Tool]

ergo, age where you can legally have sex with anyone

I support that Canadian "it's more important how close the ages are" idea, I'm not saying it originates there, just that it's the first country that comes to ming if I'm correct.
I have to agree with this, it depends on how close the ages are. I had a friend who is now considered a pedophile and got charged with rape for having sex with a 16 year old(Who was almost 17) when he was 18. The guy was a senior and the girl was a junior. I think that's just bullshit. I'm going to be in the same situation in a few months, I'm going to be turning 18 while my girlfriend is a junior so she will be turning 17. So if I get caught having sex with her while I'm 18 and she's 16 I can get in serious trouble for that. I just think that's fucked up. I don't think having sex with my girlfriend after I turn 18 is going to suddenly change everything and make me some weird pedophile.

[GreenCommunism]

Rape is complex, and in the case of the person I know and love, the aftermath of the attack she dealt with and the affect on her life was one of the most devastating things I've ever witnessed, I can't imagine how hard it is for her or anyone who has been through the same.
*facepalm* i never meant that using sedative or psychological pressure or simply using surprise sex as they call it on an underage but pubescent person who has no fucking idea whats going on is not rape. IT IS RAPE. i personally know what was sex since an early age, and i am sure adolescent who find each other attractive have an idea of what it is, in short they have to learn to say no,whether it is an adult or not. including during the act. i mean i've heard that you can't say no during the act but that's bullshit.

No it is not.

Rape is one of the worst things you can do to someone as anyone who has actually been raped or had a close friend/family member raped knows full well.

Giving in to a pushy guy or girl when you are drunk or stoned or whatever is far from being the same as actual rape.

Some crazy feminists have said that all sex under patriarchy is rape which is totally making a mockery of actual rape victims.

actually i would take it as a case per case, for some people drunken sex can be quite traumatic and for others it just happens not to affect them that much, it's still not something to take lightly, it can be the same as rape since you are not enjoying yourself.

i think the justice system do give them lighter sentence.

to be honest, i have heard of people getting mugged and suffering PTSD when they see objects or image reminding them of the event, in the teleserie Weeds we see the main character suffering from PTSD because she was in a house where a drive-by shooting happened, it isn't just rape or murder that cause post-traumatic stress though we can argue that the syndrome is higher.

another note is that i wouldn't be surprised that someone was drunk and accused someone of rape because they end up in the same tent and had sex the night before. in fact, i wouldn't be surprised if 2 person were very drunk and end up in the same tent, then of course one of them wake up the next morning freaking out and accusing the other of rape, only to find out there is no proof of sexual relationship anywhere.


Maybe they got their words jumbled, and were trying to say all rape is sex.
Who knows.

Also, will I get infractions and shit for having "pædophile liberationist" as my user title (facetiously)?

people took up a feminist word who said taht there was a problem of clear consent when mens are so powerful compared to woman. problem is, she added a whole bunch of bullshit like woman are not ready to resist a men's advance. which is absolutly hilarious, perhaps she was refering to psychological pressure. they then exagerated the whole thing and claimed all sex is rape, i would argue that sex in which there is an unfair power balance could be considered rape within this idea but i tend to disagree, the power balance does not matter if it is rape. the definition of rape for anti-sex feminist seems to be anything that isn't love, but it's kinda interesting how they deny any natural aspect to sex.

[QUOTE]Eh? Why? It's most likely just a left-over anti-sodomy/homosexuality law.

Also, just to pitch in when someone is under 17 age difference do matter and the authority, and experience, that comes with age, plus than the opposite traits in the -17 year old makes forms of cohesion rather likely. It's not about moralism, it's for the same reason a boss-employee relationship (nevermind the fucking the classenemy aspect) can be problematic. Authority. Now there are no perfect jurisdiction, and we shouldn't trick ourselves into believing that. The age of consent in sweden is 15, also, I am little fuzzy on the specifics, but if both are under 18 and the age difference is less than 3 years it is also legal, I believe. And I have no problem with that, because it is not a problem of jurisdiction. [QUOTE]

well i don't really like it, call me old school, i don't want to be moralist either, but i'm kinda scared of kids consenting to sodomy without actually realizing what they are getting into. i dunno i just have the feeling that it isn't a sexual organ like others, of course i would allow homosexuals, and yeah i don't think its a good thing, no one should be assuming it is rape. i guess we should be scared of kids consenting to sex without realizing what they are getting into as a whole.

[GreenCommunism]

Eh? Why? It's most likely just a left-over anti-sodomy/homosexuality law.

Also, just to pitch in when someone is under 17 age difference do matter and the authority, and experience, that comes with age, plus than the opposite traits in the -17 year old makes forms of cohesion rather likely. It's not about moralism, it's for the same reason a boss-employee relationship (nevermind the fucking the classenemy aspect) can be problematic. Authority. Now there are no perfect jurisdiction, and we shouldn't trick ourselves into believing that. The age of consent in sweden is 15, also, I am little fuzzy on the specifics, but if both are under 18 and the age difference is less than 3 years it is also legal, I believe. And I have no problem with that, because it is not a problem of jurisdiction.

actually i agree that it is problematic, the problem is, if you look for any authority, where does it ends, a man who is 20 and his girlfriend 18 has 10% more life experience than the other. moneys is also another factor, even beauty is a factor of authority.

as for someone who talked about the parents i guess i would agree, i am wondering if it is an equilibrium between youth right and parental protection, though i wouldn't think they should go to jail for rape, but perhaps not respecting the parent's wish. i find this is authority and kids simply will rebel. but most of those statutory rape case are about pissed off parents. so i find no clear answer. by the way, 18 is kinda young, it's not very old either.

[Adi Shankara]

well yeah i agree, i just thought that if there is any sort of sex between adults and minors then it shouldn't be buttsex, but then again what about homosexuality.

What difference does it make what kind of sex it is? molestation and rape is what it is regardless.

[Crux]

well i don't really like it, call me old school, i don't want to be moralist either, but i'm kinda scared of kids consenting to sodomy without actually realizing what they are getting into. i dunno i just have the feeling that it isn't a sexual organ like others, of course i would allow homosexuals, and yeah i don't think its a good thing, no one should be assuming it is rape. i guess we should be scared of kids consenting to sex without realizing what they are getting into as a whole.
Well, at least it can't get you pregnant. And yeah, sex ed seems like a pretty good idea regardless of sexual practice don't you think? I don't really see what would be so horrible with sodomy.

[Crux]

actually i agree that it is problematic, the problem is, if you look for any authority, where does it ends, a man who is 20 and his girlfriend 18 has 10% more life experience than the other. moneys is also another factor, even beauty is a factor of authority.

as for someone who talked about the parents i guess i would agree, i am wondering if it is an equilibrium between youth right and parental protection, though i wouldn't think they should go to jail for rape, but perhaps not respecting the parent's wish. i find this is authority and kids simply will rebel. but most of those statutory rape case are about pissed off parents. so i find no clear answer. by the way, 18 is kinda young, it's not very old either.
Well it's not about some absurd percentage of life experience derived directly from the years one happen to have lived. Of course money is a factor, gender inequality certainly is too. That doesn't mean you should pull the argument in absurdum.

And I can understand the reasoning but I also think that's a potential pandora's box. Well, I mean unless it's just a paper that makes it legal, but as you said that's pretty much how it already informally at least work. So again, it's not primarily a problem of jurisdiction.

[#FF0000]

Also, I'd just like to point out that sometimes this emotional coercion leading to rape is really the fault of the so-called "victim", for being an easily manipulatable fucktard. And that goes even if the so-called "victim" is underage. I totally agree with TAT on this one.

Oh I've been waiting so, so long for this.

B-B-B-B-BANNED

[#FF0000]

On the issue of exploitation. What do you mean by exploitation? Do you mean exploiting someone's body to get sexual gratification or something different?

I mean exploiting in the context that it's someone who is much older taking advantage of the ignorance of someone much, much, much younger.

[Apoi_Viitor]

Oh I've been waiting so, so long for this.

B-B-B-B-BANNED

I'm pretty sure he was kind of being sarcastic...

[khad]

I was paraphrasing TAT's post from the previous page, Sherlock. Of course it is an idiotic opinion. But TAT is the one saying it.

On further examination this does seem to be the case. He was sarcastically repeating what was said.

Given this information, it appears that a ban was hasty. Nevertheless, this is something that the administration has to resolve.

[#FF0000]

Word I jumped the gun. Sorry <3

[#FF0000]

But that's not an age thing. That could happen with any one of age. Manipulation doesn't just happen to young people and it doesn't happen because someone is young. It happens because certain people are fucktards. I also think these problems are more likely to occur with young people because of the way they are taught about sex, which is a completely disempowering experience. If we taught young people to be more independent, to think more independently and be equipped with sensible advise and understandings, so they were more confident and well-rounded (not that you aren't :p) then chances of manipulation are reduced.

So are you saying rape is the victim's fault. Cause I think you are.

[The Feral Underclass]

I agree. Young people who are victimized by adult predators did not get manipulated because they are too young to know better, but because they are fucktards.

That's not manipulation, that's rape.

[The Feral Underclass]

So are you saying rape is the victim's fault. Cause I think you are.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. :rolleyes:

Erm. No!

First of all, manipulation and rape are two different things. And secondly, I am referring to the manipulator as the fucktard, not the manipulated.

[The Feral Underclass]

I mean exploiting in the context that it's someone who is much older taking advantage of the ignorance of someone much, much, much younger.

But that happens irrespective of age.

[The Feral Underclass]

I think TAT was describing those who would take advantage of others sexually as "fucktards".

Yes. :)

[ContrarianLemming]

What monster have I created?

[Quail]

What monster have I created?
You should have known better than to post a thread about the age of consent on here. They always turn into some kind of flame-war :rolleyes:

[ContrarianLemming]

You should have known better than to post a thread about the age of consent on here. They always turn into some kind of flame-war :rolleyes:

I need help!

[durhamleft]

I need help!

you might as well have started a thread 'which taliban hero is your favourite' :laugh:

[Apoi_Viitor]

So guys, what's your opinion on Kronstadt?

[La Comédie Noire]

What's peoples' opinions on shows like "To Catch A Predator."?