Should The Age Of Consent Be Lowered To 13? (page 6)

shera

I don't think it should be lower,gives the pervs an easier time to be pervs.

Stacy Smith

Making thinly-veiled suggestions regarding someone's motivations (just because they disagree with you) lead me to suggest YOU are not mature enough to have sex or engage in adult conversation NOW.

Well well well, did you have much trouble climbing up on that high horse?

Isn't it amazing how it's the males here who find fault with setting a younger age limit for legal sex with girls. Just amazing.

ok, I've grown weary of this thread.

Stacy... *sigh* You know perfectly well that the age of consent is gender-neutral. In fact, as far as I can tell, you are the one who made it specifically male/female, in your post at the end of page 2.

Most boys' first sexual experience is with a girl who's older than them. But of course, no one's worried about sexual predation in that situation, are they?

core

Also, lowering the age of consent could be beneficial as it would allow youngsters to seek proper contraception and medical care.

I think that this is not an issue as youngsters ( of the age range you refer to) now can seek such advice withoput any recall to parents/guardians ( minors are afforded privacy under the various Data Protection Laws)

As Simon has noted - nothing will stop young people having sex with other young people - Laws or no Laws - what Society needs is some form of restraint/punishment on those who abuse/misuse/mislead youthful/childish innocence - the Laws are there to prevent people past their teens taking advantage of others of minor years who are impressionable, easily lead or plain inexperienced. If you lower the age to 13 when does it go down to 12 and then 11 - the ratchet of lowering standards will always move things down not up. As parents such Laws are of no value - punishing abusers is itself irelevant - what parents want is a society in which young girls and boys can enjoy their childhood without it being stolen from them by a permissive society or predatory individual.

Piph

I just wanted to chime in and say that I really enjoyed your posts, Abaddon.

I think that if sex is expressely forbidden to teenage kids, it will look even more attractive to them and become more of an obsession that it already is, and would actually foment more teenage sex out of rebellion and frustration. To me, it seems like forbidding teenagers to have sex is another form of repression.

I like the idea that's been expressed in here that the law should govern the age difference between teenage sexual partners, instead of just making a blanket age cut-off.

Phantom Stranger

Euphemism, your comment about "most boys' first experience" being with an older female - I am not agreeing or disagreeing, but I would be fascinated to know if you have any citations or references for that. It's true for me personally, but I hesitate to project that over the population at large...

Somethihg worth remembering (which Simon alluded to) is that there's what we would prefer, and there's what the kids are gonna do regardless. The law ain't gonna keep their pants on - but it might serve to keep the adults out of their pants, and that's a worthy goal.

Age at first intercourse is similar in the US and five other countries: Canada, England, France, the Netherlands, and Sweden, yet all those countries have teen pregnancy rates that are at least less than half the US rate.(9) Sex education in these other countries is based on the following components: a policy explicitly favoring sex education; openness about sex; consistent messages throughout society; and access to contraception. From http://www.caps.ucsf.edu/sexedtext.html

Euphemism

Euphemism, your comment about "most boys' first experience" being with an older female - I am not agreeing or disagreeing, but I would be fascinated to know if you have any citations or references for that.

Picking a few studies at random off Google (such as this one, this one, and this one), it seems consistent that the average age of first intercourse for males is considerably lower than for females. There are two possible deductions:

1. Females who engage in early intercourse have a considerably greater number of partners than males.

2. Most boys' first experience is with a girl who is older than them.

Since evidence also indicates that males have more partners on average (see e.g. this study), it follows that #2 is the more likely explanation.

(I think it's possible that the gender differences in the studies above may be inflated, due to over-reporting by males. Still, the differences seem to be large enough to hold in spite of that possibility.)

Interestingly, the studies above also seem to confirm what other posters have stated, that teenagers lower on the socio-economic scale are likely to have sex sooner.

shamus

I feel that it's disgusting to think that a 40 year old man can have sex with a 16 year old girl.

It should be graduated; a 13 year old should only have sex with someone closer to the age group; same with a 16 year old, 17 year old, etc. IMHO, a 17 year old should not be having sex with a 40 year old either... they need to graduate it to keep the pedophiles out.

Simon

Stacey. I do think you dragged the argument down but it was inevitable that someone would make the "low punch" that you did - accusing anyone who suggested it may be better being lowered of wanting it lowered for self interest.

Just because someone thinks the age of consent should be lowered or a two tear system introduced does not mean that they themselves want to have sex with people that age.

Simon

BTW: Isn't our society mixed up? They make laws and tell kids not to have sex and then make them read Romeo and Juliet calling it a classic.

Should The Age Of Consent Be Lowered To 13?

Share this