What kind of taliban society do we live in if it's normal for developed educated countries to keep rising age of consent like that? What's next, bringing to Europe American insanity where someone is allowed to own guns, drive cars, but not no make love? Or should we even allow sex before marriage?
Only a century ago human body was perfectly capable of having sex and reproducing around the age of 14, and it was a norm. What happened with human race since then? Did we somehow degenerated that we are not as capable as before, or it's that we now allow our governments too much in the name of "protection", "freedom" and "safety"? Do we want to live in a world when one power should be powerful enough to project its own moral norms to all the others? And who is the one to decide what is "right" and what is "wrong".
Pleas, just stop treating young boys and girls as immature idiots, and empower them with the trust. You might be surprised how capable and responsible they could grow up.
"Only a century ago human body was perfectly capable of having sex and reproducing around the age of 14, and it was a norm. What happened with human race since then?"
We've evolved as a society. It's the same reason women and minorities can vote.
"Pleas, just stop treating young boys and girls as immature idiots, and empower them with the trust. You might be surprised how capable and responsible they could grow up."
To be honest, this creeped me out (unless you are a ~14 years old). What would we possibly gain, as a society, by lowering the age of consent?
It makes it far easier to prosecute people who prey on teenagers. I don't disagree that two under 16 year olds having sex is perfectly natural and ok, though not everyone agrees. But with the age of consent being 13 sexual predators could easily seduce under 16s and claim they consented when in fact being so young they had no idea what they were doing.
Sexual predators could easily seduce 16-20 (hell, even higher) too. Why not increase the age of consent even more if you're going by with that argument.
Because the circumstances in which a 13 year old may be sexually and emotionally mature enough to consent to sex with an adult and not be a victim of manipulation are extremely unusual. That is considerably less likely to be the case in 16-20 year olds, for reasons which have as much to do with biology as prevailing social opinions
I'm assuming you agree there should be some age cut off point, unless you think sex with infants is fine and dandy so long as infants aren't looking to testify against the paedophile.
> I'm assuming you agree there should be some age cut off point, unless you think sex with infants is fine and dandy so long as infants aren't looking to testify against the paedophile.
Just up front, the form of that argument will lose you a lot of respect.
Here are three approaches to sex with infants that don't involve a cutoff age at all:
- Physical maturity threshold, e.g. menstruation / ejaculation. In a sense, this is the approach we use to drinking and driving.
- Mental maturity threshold -- an infant is not capable of anything, and so is guaranteed to fall on the banned side of the line. The biggest use of this kind of thing that I'm aware of is trying juveniles as adults.
- Just figure that nobody wants to have sex with infants. (This isn't, in the literal sense, true; I believe the youngest documented mother was two. However, it can easily be so-close-to-true-that-enforcement-is-a-loss-to-society.) This is the approach we use to prevent people from bombing trains, subways, museums, city buses, and pretty much everything else except airplanes.
> We've evolved as a society. It's the same reason women and minorities can vote.
One could give the same defence for global surveillance. "We have changed to do X" does not necessarily mean that X is a good thing. (Often it is, but in those cases we generally do X because it is good, X is not good because we do it)
The question should never be "What's the benefit of NOT prohibiting something" - that's why we call it a free society.
That being said, I think that the spanish law is rather reasonable by not strictly enforcing 16 and allowing exceptions when everyone is about the same age.
IMHO that is one problem with the age of consent: There need to be exceptions for cases where both teenagers are about the same age.
E.g. what happens when a 15yo boy wants to have consensual sex with his 17yo girlfriend? What when she is 18yo? What happens when they have sex and afterwards his parents find out and call the police?
These laws are designed to deter adults from preying on children (i.e. exploiting their relative inexperience, immaturity, financial dependence etc.) This is a good thing.
Edit: many PP (now the governing party) officials are in the sect. It has a lot of influence. Also the bishops. Abortion laws projected regression is another painful example.
Anyway society is overwhelming against those measures. PP won elections because the bad economy, not that they have fixed anything. Social politics is the "tax" we have to pay.
> An exception is made in the case of consensual sex with someone under 16 "when the other party is of a similar age or stage of development and maturity", a loose concept that judges will have to define on a case-by-case basis.
Did you read the article, or do you not trust the judges to make good calls on this?
Oh please. It would have been better to clearly define age similarity. But the exception will be still there. People around here are not so happy suing as we're making love :-)
I doubt very much that less than five years difference will make any, except in some fringe case.
So they'd be able to accuse them of rape (which they could do before anyway) but otherwise they'd need to ask a judge to charge (both of them?) with consensual sex with someone under 16 and then the Judge would decide whether it's legal or not based on his understanding of how mentally/physically mature they were in respect to each other.
It's never good to have fuzzy laws but I'm assuming the Spanish legal profession has the common sense to apply this correctly in most cases.
I wonder if you can pre-apply to have your teenage sex cleared by a Judge beforehand?
Don't walk on street, eat greens, go to your room, no telly, stop shouting, I will kick you ass if you will not shut up now!
We have so big taxes, government is spying on us, I can't drive around without insurance/tax. Only thing I receive from doctor is antibiotics. Boss says I am stupid.
I think this is fine, nothing would be in place if we did not want it, strive for it, or is it?
Any healthy thinking human should go to forest and die.
Oh fucking please. This is about adults having sex with teenagers, not teenagers having sex with one another:
> An exception is made in the case of consensual sex with someone under 16 "when the other party is of a similar age or stage of development and maturity"
This ambiguity even makes it worse. So, a "normal" 20 yo grown up can't have sex with a 15.5 year old, but mentally challenged 40 year old can, since he's "of the similar stage of development and maturity"? You see where that's going? Someone is going to arbitrary decide who can sleep with whom?
Also, what is wrong with teenagers having consentual sex with adults? That might not be moral by your standards, but why do you try to push your standards to others? You don't want to do it with teenager, it's ok, don't do it. I don't want to do it with the same sex, but I don't say that's immoral or that it should be forbidden.
Don't pretend that teenagers are somehow "not ready" for sex because you think that it's too early. Every living creature on this planet can have sex the same moment when it's physically ready. The nature sorted that out already, and there's no teed to put some arbitrary constrains over that.
> stop treating young boys and girls as immature idiots
Most adults I know are immature idiots. I include myself there. Durr durr.
> You might be surprised how capable and responsible they could grow up.
Indeed I would be surprised if that happened. Note though that when you say "could grow up" you yourself are implying that they are not "capable and responsive" at the present time.
> Do we want to live in a world when one power should be powerful enough to project its own moral norms to all the others?
Yes. And you too. I just happen to agree with the current power on this particular issue.
> Note though that when you say "could grow up" you yourself are implying that they are not "capable and responsive" at the present time.
No, I imply that some may not be "capable and responsible" at the present time because they are not empowered right now and treated as idiots, and that giving them trust would make them so.
>> Do we want to live in a world when one power should be powerful enough to project its own moral norms to all the others?
> Yes. And you too. I just happen to agree with the current power on this particular issue.
No, I don't project anything to you. As I said, do what you like, but don't forbid someone else to do the same. If you don't want to do it, fine, but if me and my boyfriend/girlfriend/neighbors what to do it, leave us alone with your projected moral views.
The reason why it is relatively low is because gipsies often marry very young, so the purpose was to avoid discrimination against gipsies. IMO the old law hasn't really been a problem, and the new law should pose a problem to gipsy customs since it has clause where it allows sex if the partner is of similar age.
34 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 44.3 ms ] threadOnly a century ago human body was perfectly capable of having sex and reproducing around the age of 14, and it was a norm. What happened with human race since then? Did we somehow degenerated that we are not as capable as before, or it's that we now allow our governments too much in the name of "protection", "freedom" and "safety"? Do we want to live in a world when one power should be powerful enough to project its own moral norms to all the others? And who is the one to decide what is "right" and what is "wrong".
Pleas, just stop treating young boys and girls as immature idiots, and empower them with the trust. You might be surprised how capable and responsible they could grow up.
We've evolved as a society. It's the same reason women and minorities can vote.
"Pleas, just stop treating young boys and girls as immature idiots, and empower them with the trust. You might be surprised how capable and responsible they could grow up."
To be honest, this creeped me out (unless you are a ~14 years old). What would we possibly gain, as a society, by lowering the age of consent?
I'm assuming you agree there should be some age cut off point, unless you think sex with infants is fine and dandy so long as infants aren't looking to testify against the paedophile.
Just up front, the form of that argument will lose you a lot of respect.
Here are three approaches to sex with infants that don't involve a cutoff age at all:
- Physical maturity threshold, e.g. menstruation / ejaculation. In a sense, this is the approach we use to drinking and driving.
- Mental maturity threshold -- an infant is not capable of anything, and so is guaranteed to fall on the banned side of the line. The biggest use of this kind of thing that I'm aware of is trying juveniles as adults.
- Just figure that nobody wants to have sex with infants. (This isn't, in the literal sense, true; I believe the youngest documented mother was two. However, it can easily be so-close-to-true-that-enforcement-is-a-loss-to-society.) This is the approach we use to prevent people from bombing trains, subways, museums, city buses, and pretty much everything else except airplanes.
One could give the same defence for global surveillance. "We have changed to do X" does not necessarily mean that X is a good thing. (Often it is, but in those cases we generally do X because it is good, X is not good because we do it)
That being said, I think that the spanish law is rather reasonable by not strictly enforcing 16 and allowing exceptions when everyone is about the same age. IMHO that is one problem with the age of consent: There need to be exceptions for cases where both teenagers are about the same age. E.g. what happens when a 15yo boy wants to have consensual sex with his 17yo girlfriend? What when she is 18yo? What happens when they have sex and afterwards his parents find out and call the police?
Edit: many PP (now the governing party) officials are in the sect. It has a lot of influence. Also the bishops. Abortion laws projected regression is another painful example.
Anyway society is overwhelming against those measures. PP won elections because the bad economy, not that they have fixed anything. Social politics is the "tax" we have to pay.
It's weird that the Guardian tucked that at the end of the article instead of reverting them and putting the destruction of sex ed' as the main title.
Did you read the article, or do you not trust the judges to make good calls on this?
I doubt very much that less than five years difference will make any, except in some fringe case.
So they'd be able to accuse them of rape (which they could do before anyway) but otherwise they'd need to ask a judge to charge (both of them?) with consensual sex with someone under 16 and then the Judge would decide whether it's legal or not based on his understanding of how mentally/physically mature they were in respect to each other.
It's never good to have fuzzy laws but I'm assuming the Spanish legal profession has the common sense to apply this correctly in most cases.
I wonder if you can pre-apply to have your teenage sex cleared by a Judge beforehand?
We have so big taxes, government is spying on us, I can't drive around without insurance/tax. Only thing I receive from doctor is antibiotics. Boss says I am stupid.
I think this is fine, nothing would be in place if we did not want it, strive for it, or is it?
Any healthy thinking human should go to forest and die.
> An exception is made in the case of consensual sex with someone under 16 "when the other party is of a similar age or stage of development and maturity"
Also, what is wrong with teenagers having consentual sex with adults? That might not be moral by your standards, but why do you try to push your standards to others? You don't want to do it with teenager, it's ok, don't do it. I don't want to do it with the same sex, but I don't say that's immoral or that it should be forbidden.
Don't pretend that teenagers are somehow "not ready" for sex because you think that it's too early. Every living creature on this planet can have sex the same moment when it's physically ready. The nature sorted that out already, and there's no teed to put some arbitrary constrains over that.
Most adults I know are immature idiots. I include myself there. Durr durr.
> You might be surprised how capable and responsible they could grow up.
Indeed I would be surprised if that happened. Note though that when you say "could grow up" you yourself are implying that they are not "capable and responsive" at the present time.
> Do we want to live in a world when one power should be powerful enough to project its own moral norms to all the others?
Yes. And you too. I just happen to agree with the current power on this particular issue.
No, I imply that some may not be "capable and responsible" at the present time because they are not empowered right now and treated as idiots, and that giving them trust would make them so.
>> Do we want to live in a world when one power should be powerful enough to project its own moral norms to all the others?
> Yes. And you too. I just happen to agree with the current power on this particular issue.
No, I don't project anything to you. As I said, do what you like, but don't forbid someone else to do the same. If you don't want to do it, fine, but if me and my boyfriend/girlfriend/neighbors what to do it, leave us alone with your projected moral views.
WTF?
But well, it is the PP who we are talking about. The Spanish traditional hypocritical right catholic moral.