Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Should the age of consent be increased to 18? watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    16 isn't the right age..... It should be lowered and an age limit to have sex with people under 18 should be limited to 21


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I would say the only people who should be allowed to have sex with school children is NO ONE, however, if it is to be allowed it should ONLY be school children of the same age otherwise it should be statutory rape. A 21 year old having sex with a school child sounds pretty disgusting.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    no - if anything it's too high.
    the netherlands, france, sweden, spain, japan, denmark etc all have lower ages and lower rates of teen pregnancies and sexual assaults
    maybe not inherently *because* of the more realistic age of consent but it is likely a factor
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    I agree that it should be raised to at least 18; perhaps even higher.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    I live in the Usa. I'm not sure about the west coast thing. If you're a teen and in high school then no one cares. You can be 18 and dating someone who is younger than you. Once you're out of high school then the law applies to you. Age 16 is little young to me. Can't people drink alcohol at that age in the UK?

    I think the age of consent is fine as long as the person dating him or her isn't like 10 years older than them. You can regret losing your virginity to a 30 year old then him or her dumping you. I think people should have be allowed to have sex after knowing what they're getting themselves involved into instead of not educating them of the consequences of it and then waiting someone is pregnant for them to figure out. If people can do at 16 I think its a reasonable age.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by FredOrJohn)
    Recently in the UK its been reduced to 16 (past few years) for gay sex - to bring in line with non-gay sex.

    I was thinking this is retrogressive.

    The most progressive place (west coast USA) thinks it more important to give total protection to boys and girls from predators (whether 18 year olds in same school or even 16 year olds in same class or even way older)..

    If we're too young to be parents I would suggest we're too young to have legal sex.

    A progressive society should protect young people from all pressures until they have at least all left school.

    In the olden days it was common to leave at 16, now its far more common to leave school at 18 .

    Should the law be changed to take into account the change in society?
    Majority of people I know, including myself, didn't adhere to the law as it is, let alone if it was increased...
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I'd go with that, although I think it's much more important to teach boys how to talk to girls (and vice versa). Basically I would enforce U16 more strictly (mainly to give teens who feel pressured by other teens a stronger official reason to say no) but I would also send them all on "practice dates" with random pairings each week.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Unown Uzer)
    I agree that it should be raised to at least 18; perhaps even higher.
    but why? human beings biologically are ready for sex at a younger age than 16 - that's the thing about consent - whether it's good or consequentially convenient that they hold off from sex until later isn't in the formula of the concept of "consent"
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    but why? human beings biologically are ready for sex at a younger age than 16 - that's the thing about consent - whether it's good or consequentially convenient that they hold off from sex until later isn't in the formula of the concept of "consent"
    You cannot buy pretty mild beer at a supermarket until you are 18.

    Of course this does not stop those that are younger than 18 drinking
    but it does involve significantly more planning by under 18 year olds before they can drink.

    Likewise, changing the law about sex, will not stop underage sex, but potentially it will make underage sex significantly more planned and organised, and less casual.

    It will also cut back old people having sex with teenagers - which I think all sides think would be a good thing.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FredOrJohn)
    You cannot buy pretty mild beer at a supermarket until you are 18.

    Of course this does not stop those that are younger than 18 drinking
    but it does involve significantly more planning by under 18 year olds before they can drink.
    the age of being allowed to buy alcohol =/= age of being able to consent to drinking alcohol though. that's why we don't call it the "age of consent of drinking", we just call it the "drinking age". (i.e. a dad can give his child a drink of beer and that's not illegal) alcohol is a dangerous substance in reality, but sex isn't "dangerous" to ones health in that sense. there is no special condom for drinking like there is for sex.

    Likewise, changing the law about sex, will not stop underage sex, but potentially it will make underage sex significantly more planned and organised, and less casual.
    proof? countries that have lower ages of consent have less teen pregnancies

    It will also cut back old people having sex with teenagers - which I think all sides think would be a good thing.
    how is that relevant? why would we make the law on consent to sex based on our prejudices against old(er) individuals having consensual sex with teenagers?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A-LJLB)
    You can get free contraception from the age of 13 so... Wouldn't make a difference? People will do what they want
    Exactly this. Ultimately it doesn't matter what the ages of consent is, people will do what they want. It's our job to make it as safe as possible, having options for contraception etc... It's sort of like in Denmark, or the Netherlands IIRC they have heroin clinics where people who have an addiction to heroin can come into the clinic and get a safe fix of heroin.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    proof? countries that have lower ages of consent have less teen pregnancies
    Its difficult to draw definitive conclusions because cultures are multidimensional (eg a bad thing in one dimension might produce two good things in another).

    We do know that California has 18 as the age of consent and although it might have higher levels of teenage pregnancy (guessing) most teenagers, even UK 16 year olds having sex, would prefer to go to school in California.

    Thus its quite likely that strong armed parenting (california legal system) makes teenage school years more fun for most people.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FredOrJohn)
    Its difficult to draw definitive conclusions because cultures are multidimensional (eg a bad thing in one dimension might produce two good things in another).

    We do know that California has 18 as the age of consent and although it might have higher levels of teenage pregnancy (guessing) most teenagers, even UK 16 year olds having sex, would prefer to go to school in California.

    Thus its quite likely that strong armed parenting (california legal system) makes teenage school years more fun for most people.
    ...or put it this way, rich toffs, tend to get parliament to vote for lowering the age of consent for "serving classes" but they themselves, generation after generation send their children to single sex schools.

    They are creating mini-legal systems in which the rich benefit from concentrating on school work, whereas all their serving classes are happy to be teenage sex play things - often damaging their academic ability in the process - which is a double win for the rich toff, sex and lack of competition for their own off spring.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Here's a radical idea, increase it to 17.
    When you think of it, it makes all of the sense in the world.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jebedee)
    Here's a radical idea, increase it to 17.
    When you think of it, it makes all of the sense in the world.
    Ah, the old arbitrary-a-roo
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 34908seikj)
    Ah, the old arbitrary-a-roo
    Most people lose their virginity at 17. 16 is too young and 18 is a bit excessive. It's just 17 is an odd number so people don't think of it.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    but why? human beings biologically are ready for sex at a younger age than 16 - that's the thing about consent - whether it's good or consequentially convenient that they hold off from sex until later isn't in the formula of the concept of "consent"
    To me, it's not so much of an age of consent. Instead, it is more about legislating the best minimum age for people to start having sex, and I think 16 is too low of an age.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Unown Uzer)
    To me, it's not so much of an age of consent. Instead, it is more about legislating the best minimum age for people to start having sex, and I think 16 is too low of an age.
    so you're admitting "age of consent" isn't a good title for it
    maybe "age in which we legally allow free people to have consensual sex" is more appropriate
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    lol no point 14 years olds will still bang anyway, thats what being 14 is for
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    so you're admitting "age of consent" isn't a good title for it
    maybe "age in which we legally allow free people to have consensual sex" is more appropriate
    Yes, that's a more accurate name, but I believe it is already defined in law what 'age of consent' is, so there is no real need to change it.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by banterboy)
    lol no point 14 years olds will still bang anyway, thats what being 14 is for
    Top Bantz but your right they will so for me it's about who is legally allowed to 'bang' them


    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
Poll
Who is your favourite TV detective?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.