posted July 29, 2013 04:11 PM            

quote:

---

In statutory rape, overt force or threat need not be present. The laws[where?] presume coercion, because a minor or mentally challenged adult is legally incapable of giving consent to the act.

The term "statutory rape" generally refers to sex between an adult and a sexually mature minor past the age of puberty. Sexual relations with a prepubescent child, generically called "child sexual abuse" or "molestation", is typically treated as a more serious crime.

---

So, if an 18 year-old has sex with his 17 year-old girlfriend, he could go to jail. I think there is something SERIOUSLY wrong with that. I also think the age of consent ought to be lowered and criteria ought to be added to at least enable a minor to choose a partner up to...say, ten years...his or her senior.

Laura Ingalls Wilder was 15 when she started dating Almanzo who was 25. Elvis was 24 when he started dating Priscilla who was 14.

I just don't see what's wrong with that. Maybe because when I was a teenager I was willing to date guys much older than 18 (and eventually married a man 18 years my senior.)

The assumption of the law, that minors cannot think for themselves, is absurd. Why allow them to have sex at all then, when there are risks like pregnancy and STDs involved, and they aren't "legally" competent to assess those risks?

The fact that the punishment for the adult in the relationship can be as harsh as 15 years imprisonment seems draconian.

That's my opinion. Hope I didn't offend anyone.

What's your opinion?

posted July 29, 2013 04:28 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:
These laws irritate me.

[QUOTE]In statutory rape, overt force or threat need not be present. The laws[where?] presume coercion, because [b]a minor or mentally challenged adult is legally incapable of giving consent to the act.

The term "statutory rape" generally refers to sex between an adult and a sexually mature minor past the age of puberty. Sexual relations with a prepubescent child, generically called "child sexual abuse" or "molestation", is typically treated as a more serious crime.

---

So, if an 18 year-old has sex with his 17 year-old girlfriend, he could go to jail. I think there is something SERIOUSLY wrong with that. I also think the age of consent ought to be lowered and criteria ought to be added to at least enable a minor to choose a partner up to...say, ten years...his or her senior.

Laura Ingalls Wilder was 15 when she started dating Almanzo who was 25. Elvis was 24 when he started dating Priscilla who was 14.

I just don't see what's wrong with that. Maybe because when I was a teenager I was willing to date guys much older than 18 (and eventually married a man 18 years my senior.)

The assumption of the law, that minors cannot think for themselves, is absurd. Why allow them to have sex at all then, when there are risks like pregnancy and STDs involved, and they aren't "legally" competent to assess those risks?

The fact that the punishment for the adult in the relationship can be as harsh as 15 years imprisonment seems draconian.

That's my opinion. Hope I didn't offend anyone.

What's your opinion?

posted July 29, 2013 05:12 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by aquaguy91:

they irritate me too. especially given the fact that they mostly affect men. When I was 18 A 15 year old girl had a crush on me and wanted to date me but I couldn't do it because it could have landed me in deep crap.

---

At least you were sensible about it.

What bothers me is, you could have had a non-sexual relationship and still come under fire. Like the one-time boyfriend of bullying victim Phoebe Prince.
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20487488,00.html

There was no evidence to say that they ever consummated their love, if you get my drift, yet he was still forced to stand trial.

posted July 29, 2013 05:18 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:
At least you were sensible about it.

What bothers me is, you could have had a non-sexual relationship and still come under fire. Like the one-time boyfriend of bullying victim Phoebe Prince.
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20487488,00.html

There was no evidence to say that they ever consummated their love, if you get my drift, yet he was still forced to stand trial.

No wonder kids hate adults...because of cr*p like this.

---

posted July 29, 2013 05:26 PM            

What got me thinking of this was, I was up late bored out of my wits the other night so I watched a Dr. Phil episode about an older woman facing 15 years in jail for her relationship with a 16 year-old.

Now...is that WEIRD? A 28 year-old with a 16 year old? Yeah, ewwwwww I think it's weird!

But to brand her a pedophile and send her to the slammer for 15 years (that is the actual sentence she is up against) when the kid is about 6 feet tall and 180 pounds, and they are engaged?

posted July 29, 2013 05:49 PM            

If two people are deeply in love the law isn't going to stop them, yes even if that means waiting a few years for pda, THE HORROR.

posted July 29, 2013 05:50 PM            

Re: 10 years: There's just too much of a disparity between where a 15-year-old is mentally and emotionally and where a 25-year-old is for me to get on board with that.

posted July 29, 2013 05:54 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kerosene:
Even thou it's an unpopular opinion, I don't disagree with age consent laws at all.

---

Neither do I.

Though I would see a difference between a 17 year old young adult and let`s say a 9 year old.

posted July 29, 2013 05:56 PM            

"Germany[edit]

posted July 29, 2013 06:42 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:
if an 18 year-old has sex with his 17 year-old girlfriend, he could go to jail. I think there is something SERIOUSLY wrong with that. I also think the age of consent ought to be lowered and criteria ought to be added to at least enable a minor to choose a partner up to...say, ten years...his or her senior.

---

I don't. However, when an 18-year-old is charged for being with a 17-year-old then I do think the law is being misapplied (that is, I do see a place for age cushions). However, that's because I assume it's to protect unsophisticated kids from predatory adults rather than for "puritanism." I think puritans have a lot more to do with the creation and enforcement of these laws than those more concerned with actual protection (that is, these laws were actually designed to protect MORALS rather than kids).

And to me it would be silly to say a 14-year-old COULD be chosen by someone up to 24 but not 25...

Granted, there are a number of kids who are actually more sensible and mature than plenty of adults, but the law isn't able to take them into account (at least not unless they get themselves emancipated, which I hope they would if it were that important to them).

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:
Laura Ingalls Wilder was 15 when she started dating Almanzo who was 25. Elvis was 24 when he started dating Priscilla who was 14

---

Laura Ingalls Wilder was of a different time, and her future was already defined by virtue of being female anyway so that it wouldn't make a difference how old she was. Furthermore, I strongly suspect kids were much more adult back then (ie, not insulated in a metaphoric bubble the way kids today are their brains matured a lot faster, for better and worse, than today). In any case, saying something was right back then doesn't mean that therefore it should be ok today. And honestly, I don't know enough about those specific relationships to believe that they were or were not ok.

Btw, would you say it's ok for a 13-year-old to marry (or at least have sex with) her 27-year-old first cousin? After all Virginia Poe did, and if your historical examples are why it should be ok today then why not this example?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:
The assumption of the law, that minors cannot think for themselves, is absurd. Why allow them to have sex at all then, when there are risks like pregnancy and STDs involved, and they aren't "legally" competent to assess those risks?

---

I don't think it's absurd, I agree that minors are inexperienced, unsophisticated, don't expect as much self-control of many of them, easily manipulated & coerced by adults who are authority figures over them who can and do abuse their inherent authority (even rebellious teens tend to grudgingly fall in line). (Btw, fun fact, most underage girls who get pregnant are made that way by adults who illegally had sex with them rather than another teen; said girls were often devastated when the adult then dropped her.) And because I hold adults to higher standards to self-control (especially once they're 25) I'm not the least bit sympathetic when they say "s/he came onto me." (The only way I'd be sympathetic was if the person REASONABLY did not know, though I'm cynical of that, especially like when I read of one guy claiming he thought she was an adult despite that he picked her up repeatedly from middle school! )

And the number of adults who already take advantage of unsophisticated kids are legion, even with the laws in place.

Furthermore, I see it at the very least as being similar to jobs against sexual harassment by employers and other people who have power over you. By definition adults automatically have more power over any kid by virtue of their age, even if the adult is actually the more honorable and open minded sort (as opposed to a player) and the kid unusually mature.

I believe most would say teens shouldn't have sex with each other either, but most people realize that they can't stop it from happening (though that doesn't stop them from trying)...in part that goes to kids having less ability to control themselves than adults (generally speaking), and that we hold adults to higher standards than kids in exercising self-control.

But going back to the puritans, I've read news stories of teens who were convicted of having sex with minors (and getting on sexual predator d-base) for having sex with each other, so that they're both victim and perpetrator, which I see as absurd (and that kids should never be prosecuted under these laws), and defeating the point of protecting kids (since the law harms them for being kids, and it's not like 13-year-olds are inclined to think of how something could ruin their lives anyway, but then this is not a concern if the motivation is puritanism rather than actually protecting kids).

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:
The fact that the punishment for the adult in the relationship can be as harsh as 15 years imprisonment seems draconian

---

posted July 29, 2013 06:53 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:
The assumption of the law, that minors cannot think for themselves, is absurd

---

Btw, if you think kids are capable of making adult decisions, then why not just declare them adults (with all the rights and responsibilities that entails, including having sex with someone 10 years older) and be done with it?

posted July 29, 2013 07:59 PM            

@mockingbird, I think that's a good step in the right direction.

@Ceri, for an adult to get involved with a 9 year-old would be prosecuted as sexual molestation here, not statutory rape.

Germany's age of consent sounds more reasonable to me. NOT because I am advocating children getting involved with adults, but because I think it ought to be a matter of upbringing and not law, and there are sometimes extraordinary circumstances where people of disparate ages fall in love.

@Pixie, you asked:

quote:

---

Btw, would you say it's ok for a 13-year-old to marry (or at least have sex with) her 27-year-old first cousin? After all Virginia Poe did, and if your historical examples are why it should be ok today then why not this example? "

---

Because that's incest.

I would like to see the legal age lowered, that's just my opinion, and then it should be a parental guidance issue instead of a legal issue. If 15 year-olds are getting pregnant left and right, and that's perfectly legal, then why shouldn't it be legal for a 15 year-old to choose a 25 year-old lover? And if it's wrong, why doesn't the 15 year-old face charges as well?

I really don't think it matters that times are different now than in the Wilders' time. I'm not talking about the morality or rightness of it, but legality, which I see as a wholly separate issue.

After all, if teenagers are "incapable of giving their consent" to sex, then how can there ever be consensual sex between teenagers? Wouldn't it be something like two-way rape?

quote:

---

I don't think it's absurd, I agree that minors are inexperienced, unsophisticated, don't expect as much self-control of many of them, easily manipulated & coerced by adults who are authority figures over them who can and do abuse their inherent authority (even rebellious teens tend to grudgingly fall in line).

---

Why not RAISE the statutory rape age of adult to something higher than 18 to reflect that? Because I sure as heck didn't think of 20 year-olds as adults when I was 15.

All I'm saying is, some reform would be nice here.

quote:

---

And because I hold adults to higher standards to self-control (especially once they're 25) I'm not the least bit sympathetic when they say "s/he came onto me.

---

Then why not persecute it as rape, fair and square? If the girl is testifying that she did want it, that should count in his favor. If she's saying she didn't, that should count as rape.

My main point really is, it ought to be worked out between the parents and their children. I don't want my daughter even dating before she is 16, but because I respect her and she knows it, when the time comes, I'm hoping she will understand where my concerns are coming from.

quote:

---

By definition adults automatically have more power over any kid by virtue of their age, even if the adult is actually the more honorable and open minded sort (as opposed to a player) and the kid unusually mature.

---

Persuasive power, maybe? But not necessarily physical power. And frankly, I knew guys in high school who were more verbally persuasive and physically bigger than guys in their 20's. So these distinctions don't hold too much sway with me.

quote:

---

Btw, if you think kids are capable of making adult decisions, then why not just declare them adults (with all the rights and responsibilities that entails, including having sex with someone 10 years older) and be done with it?

---

It's a good question. You mentioned how kids were a lot more adult in the Wilders' time...could it be because they were legally treated as adults from a young age? They were allowed to drink, skip school, have full-time jobs, and do a lot of other things that modern teens can't always do? I think we coddle teenagers and that prolongs their childhood, keeping them immature. I think we expect too little from them.

Again, I think it ought to be something worked out primarily between the parents and the children.I see it as a matter of upbringing, and if that puts more pressure on the parents, so what? What are parents supposed to be doing? Stuff like this as far as I'm concerned.

posted July 29, 2013 08:00 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by YoursTrulyAlways:
Of course, as always, I'm the only one with the opposing viewpoint. I personally think sexual relations ought not to occur before 18 years old, and ideally after the wedding. Oh well. Flame if you need to. It's ok.

---

posted July 29, 2013 09:06 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:
Then the question is, should sexual acts committed by teenagers be persecuted in court?

---

Not the teens. Their parents. Yes. Prosecutor should slap charges and drag them all to court. Indeed.

If I have a daughter, I would hang the boy by the balls, if he'll survive my shotgun shell.

posted July 29, 2013 09:15 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by YoursTrulyAlways:
Of course, as always, I'm the only one with the opposing viewpoint. I personally think sexual relations ought not to occur before 18 years old, and ideally after the wedding. Oh well. Flame if you need to. It's ok.

---

Go you

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted July 29, 2013 09:35 PM            

In my experience in high school only bottom feeders would go out with underclassmen specifically 9th graders.
It's just not accepted in this society.
If you don't like it move to Canada or Europe..

Anyways if you genuinely like someone why can't you wait a few years?
lust is no excuse.....

posted July 29, 2013 10:19 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by somethingexcellent:
I always thought it was to protect minors from being preyed on by older people, and to help reinforce minors from getting themselves in over their head...in this regard, I do support it. I knew a 14 year old who thought he could race around with a 19 year old, but he was honestly just getting ahead of himself and it was really creepy and gross...

---

I know of situations where that's creepy and gross. I also know of other situations where it isn't or wasn't. I had friends who got engaged when she was 13 and he was 18. They got married when she was 15. That was about 40 years ago and they are one of the most solid couples I ever met.

Lots of girls used to get married in their teen years in the 60's, it was a fad. The mothers of two of my best friends from childhood got married at 17. One couple lasted 25 years, the other couple is still happily married.

I know other examples.

posted July 29, 2013 11:25 PM            

quote:

---

You mentioned how kids were a lot more adult in the Wilders' time...could it be because they were legally treated as adults from a young age? They were allowed to drink, skip school, have full-time jobs, and do a lot of other things that modern teens can't always do? I think we coddle teenagers and that prolongs their childhood, keeping them immature. I think we expect too little from them.

---

That's good. The majority--and I mean vast majority--of those promoting getting rid of these laws believe kids should NOT be able vote, act on juries, have the same access to firearms that adults do, drive, or even back talk them, but that adults should still be able to use them as disempowered c-dumpsters. Interesting enough many of them see no problem with teachers dating their own students while not caring about how college instructors or bosses aren't supposed to do that either with the adults under their authority (despite all the ethical issues this brings up which would be even worse for kids). After years of noticing this trend it's hard not to hold anyone in suspicion who wants to get rid of the laws now. I'm glad you're a rare exception.

quote:

---

I think it ought to be something worked out primarily between the parents and the children.I see it as a matter of upbringing, and if that puts more pressure on the parents, so what? What are parents supposed to be doing? Stuff like this as far as I'm concerned

---