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

The age of consent should be lowered to 13. Watch

  • View Poll Results: Should the age of consent be lowered to 13?
    yes
    30
    11.32%
    no
    222
    83.77%
    other
    13
    4.91%

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by niall c)
    Hebephilia, as noted by another poster above. For its part, incidentally, paedophilia is presently defined as a psychiatric disorder, not a crime. You have thus conflated three things - hebephilia, paedophilia, and child abuse. I believe you would get on well with some of our Vatican-based friends, who wish to add homosexuality into this nonsense on stilts mixture (try Cardinal Bertone).

    Have the military contacted you yet about putting your clairvoyance skills to good use?

    EDIT: Re your original post: you're also aware that statutory rape applies to those below 13, right?
    The Vatican? The army? Clairvoyance? Where did I mention child abuse? :blah:


    I have no idea what you are ranting about nor why your getting so annoyed but I couldn't really care less. Have at the 13 year olds if you wish, my moral compass leads to me not agree with the thought though of an 18 year old going out with a 13 year old.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Luminality)
    The Vatican? The army? Clairvoyance? Where did I mention child abuse? :blah:


    I have no idea what you are ranting about nor why your getting so annoyed but I couldn't really care less. Have at the 13 year olds if you wish, my moral compass leads to me not agree with the thought though of an 18 year old going out with a 13 year old.
    I have made no judgement on either of you pair's opinions on going out with 13 year olds. I was simply pointing out that your attack, in the way it confused several separate things, was unhelpful.

    Child abuse: You confused several things: because he went out with a 13yo, he must love 13 yos (questionable); because he loves 13 yos, he must be a paedophile (wrong); because he is a paedophile, he must be a child molester. If you can't see what's wrong with this now, I doubt you ever will.

    The Vatican: wrongly associating certain morally reprehensible actions with things that you personally dislike is also practised by our Catholic buddies. Certain amongst their number aimed to discredit homosexuality by associating it with child abuse (ironically, to defend their own institution's record on the crime). Having such a strong moral compass, I presume that you would see the conflation of homosexuality with child rape as wrong; thus, I presume you can likewise see the problem with what your reasoning.

    Military/clairvoyance: you knew for a fact that he 'would have eventually' had sex with a girl three years under the age of consent. Seen as you can tell intentions and the future so well, I was wondering if you would put your skills to good use.

    As an aside: I've been to parts of rural Spain where an 18/19 yo and a 13 yo going out is completely normal. They were as vehement as you are in rejecting - without a moment's reflection - the opposing view. My question, then, is how you are so certain that you - brought up in a culture that explicitly reflects the high age of consent - are absolutely correct, and all relationships between early and late teens must be harmful to the younger partner.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    Is it purely due to societal norms that such an age gap would be "worrying"? Or is there anything intrinsically different between a 13 year old having sex with another 13 year old vs having sex with a 40 year old? Is there any real necessity or practical benefit in the two partners being close together in age? Or is it just that it is a societal norm, and society doesn't generally look kindly on deviants?
    I agree that plenty of people would find the idea 'disgusting', but then not long ago people would have probably said the same about homosexual or interracial relationships. Societal norms can change.

    Also, do you think that a sexual relationship between a 13 year old and a 53 year old is equally "worrying" and "wrong" as a sexual relationship between say, an 18 year old and a 58 year old? (Same age gap). Do you think society and the law should make arrangements to restrict the latter relationship as well?
    I think it's more of an age thing to do with the mind and body of the younger partner. An eighteen year old in most cases will have a fully formed body, and their mind will probably be much more developed, experienced and adult in decision making as opposed to a thirteen year old's.

    With regards to the age difference, I think that if the age of consent were lowered then after a period we would begin to see relationships between young teens and much older partners, as is the norm in some different societies, but I think for the large majority it would still be seen as wrong for a long time because of the youngsters childish nature.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    13 year-olds are children, they are NOT mature enough to make adult decisions about sex. If they're not mature enough to drink alcohol or have a job, they're certainly not mature enough for sex and all the complications that go along with it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by niall c)
    I have made no judgement on either of you pair's opinions on going out with 13 year olds. I was simply pointing out that your attack, in the way it confused several separate things, was unhelpful.
    Really, your inital comment was filled with a certain sarcastic and tone that seemed to look down. The very tone of your comment regarding the likes of the church and the army and such. I think there were some judgements there.

    Child abuse: You confused several things: because he went out with a 13yo, he must love 13 yos (questionable); because he loves 13 yos, he must be a paedophile (wrong); because he is a paedophile, he must be a child molester. If you can't see what's wrong with this now, I doubt you ever will.
    Okay. You need to relax. I saw it, stop acting so pompous. Geez you seem uptight.

    The Vatican: wrongly associating certain morally reprehensible actions with things that you personally dislike is also practised by our Catholic buddies. Certain amongst their number aimed to discredit homosexuality by associating it with child abuse (ironically, to defend their own institution's record on the crime). Having such a strong moral compass, I presume that you would see the conflation of homosexuality with child rape as wrong; thus, I presume you can likewise see the problem with what your reasoning.
    I am not catholic nor do I condemn homosexuals so your comment is unwarranted and unjustified. Your vehement commenting is just getting boring now. You made a point. I accepted it. I merely said Your parts on the army and clairvoyance and catholics was random and needless.

    Military/clairvoyance: you knew for a fact that he 'would have eventually' had sex with a girl three years under the age of consent. Seen as you can tell intentions and the future so well, I was wondering if you would put your skills to good use.
    Okay.

    As an aside: I've been to parts of rural Spain where an 18/19 yo and a 13 yo going out is completely normal. They were as vehement as you are in rejecting - without a moment's reflection - the opposing view. My question, then, is how you are so certain that you - brought up in a culture that explicitly reflects the high age of consent - are absolutely correct, and all relationships between early and late teens must be harmful to the younger partner.
    Okay. It is a view I hold as a result of my social upbringing and from the standard of intelligence and maturity I have seen in the majority of 13 year old girls when compared to a 18 year old partner. I do not think it is right as that is far too young an age for them to understand sex and the complications that come with it as this thread was about the age of consent so naturally I assumed he did go far with her. If you want to, its up to you, but on a student forum I am entitled to state my view.

    I bore of this discussion, I merely stated an opinion, I am entitled to it as you are to yours but I have no intention of having a debate nor a discussion about this. If you have more to say, as I am sure your informative and pedantic self do, I have nothing more to add.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    :lolwut: I didn't even hit puberty 'til I was 14, and I wasn't the last of my friends. None of my friends did before turning 13. My mum was 16, that seems to be the upper limit for healthy women. Before then, you are a child, your body is not ready for sex, let alone your mental and emotional maturity.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Luminality)
    I bore of this discussion, I merely stated an opinion, I am entitled to it as you are to yours but I have no intention of having a debate nor a discussion about this. If you have more to say, as I am sure your informative and pedantic self do, I have nothing more to add.
    Trust me, I care less than you...but I'm not sure what the point in stating an opinion you're not prepared to discuss/debate/justify is. Isn't that kind of having your cake and eating it?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by niall c)
    Trust me, I care less than you...but I'm not sure what the point in stating an opinion you're not prepared to discuss/debate/justify is. Isn't that kind of having your cake and eating it?
    Not really. Thats a completely invalid point. The implication of an opinion is not debate over it. If someone asks whether X should undergo Y, then I simply state yes or no. The thread was a closed question nor an open indepth one. I did, I was in no way required nor does it follow to assume I should argue about it. You care less? Yet you had those long winded and obviously smirky comments?

    Okay, well anyway yea I do not want to go on about this. If you do care less than me, don't reply. :dontknow:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Does anyone truly imagine that the age of consent stops any sexual activity?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by simontinsley)
    Does anyone truly imagine that the age of consent stops any sexual activity?
    No, but I don't think that's really what the debate is about. It's about whether 13 year olds are mature enough to consent to sex with adults.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Annora)
    No, but I don't think that's really what the debate is about. It's about whether 13 year olds are mature enough to consent to sex with adults.
    Why should it be about that?

    If it makes no practical difference, I see little argument for or against lowering the age to 13.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aliluvschoc)
    It's fine as it is. It's there to protect young people from abuse. In the vast majority of underage sex, no one bats an eyelid because it's not harming anyone. When it is abusive, the law is there to be put to use.

    And in any case, most 13 year olds are just really not having sex with 18 year olds.

    Also we are in Britain. The age of consent is 16.
    Whether or not we are in Britain should make no difference. The law should protect young people from abuse. I'd make it a higher age when the other person is a lot older.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by simontinsley)
    Does anyone truly imagine that the age of consent stops any sexual activity?
    hm no but that's not what its meant to do its meant to protect chldren from adults taking advantage of them. if a 13year old has sex with a 14 year old no one cares and no ones exactly going to come and arrest them its so that if say a 50 year old tricks a 13 year old into sex they can be prosecuted..

    edit: so I'd say no it shouldn't be lowered to 13 because if people under the age of consent want to have sex with each other they can anyway all lowering the age would do would make it seem to some older people that it was acceptable to have sex with people that young. I often tell people I'm 15 and they leave me alone straight away but if I said I was 16 or my real age they wouldn't and in reality theres not really a big difference between a 15 year old and a 16 year old; only the age of consent and the possibility of them going to jail.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by simontinsley)
    Why should it be about that?

    If it makes no practical difference, I see little argument for or against lowering the age to 13.
    It's not illegal for a 13 y o to have sex with a 13 y o. It does make a practical difference, imo, for an adult to have sex with a 13 y o. They're not mature enough to make sensible decisions about sex. They're not even mature enough to have a job or drink alcohol. So it's my opinion that an adult that has sex with a child is abusing that child.
    • Offline

      1
      (Original post by Rakas21)
      ...given that the average age of virginity loss in the UK is 15, despite the legal age being 16, i would support a lowering of the age to 14/15, ...
      Can you provide a verifiable source for this statistic please; the reason for asking being that the Durex survey evidenced the average age of loss of virginity in the UK was 16.3 years. Britain has the ignoble reputation of being the country where the age at loss of virginity is the youngest in the world!

      Below the age of 16 years boys should still be playing with their Action Men and girls with their Barbie dolls...in a non-sexual manner!
      Offline

      0
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by yawn)
      Can you provide a verifiable source for this statistic please; the reason for asking being that the Durex survey evidenced the average age of loss of virginity in the UK was 16.3 years. Britain has the ignoble reputation of being the country where the age at loss of virginity is the youngest in the world!

      Below the age of 16 years boys should still be playing with their Action Men and girls with their Barbie dolls...in a non-sexual manner!
      You played with Action man when you were 15?:curious:
      • Offline

        1
        (Original post by Jarlsberg)
        You played with Action man when you were 15?:curious:
        I've never played with an Action Man...now bows and arrows and sherrif badges and rifles are another matter!

        I certainly never played with a male's genitals when I was fifteen.
        Offline

        0
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by SaturnVengeance)
        It's stupid and pointless to lock someone up because they had sex with a teenager. It's stupid, teens have sex with teens and adults have sex with adults, so why can't adults have sex with teens? Hell I have several friends who could go to prison for having sex with their 13-17 year old girlfriends, just because they are 18-21 years old. Hell right now I'm interested in a woman who is 17, but we wouldn't legally be able to have sex because I'm 18. My last girlfriend was 13 years old, and that was when I was 18 also. It's just a really stupid rule. There are people who have gone to prison and are registered sex offenders because they had sex with the person who is currently their wife, but they weren't when they had sex. Technically it's not pedophilia if they are 13 or older, so it has nothing to do with pedophilia. In some US states you can get married at 13. It's just a pointless law that puts good people behind bars. At 13 they are a teenager and able to make their own decisions. Who else would like the age of consent to be lowered to 13?
        You're an idiot. And you were 18 and had a 13-year-old girlfriend. That's pretty disturbing man. The law holds it at 16 (not 18) for a reason and that reason is the vast majority of people under that age aren't mature enough to make the decision. Most 16-year-olds aren't.
        Offline

        0
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by yawn)
        I've never played with an Action Man...now bows and arrows and sherrif badges and rifles are another matter!

        I certainly never played with a male's genitals when I was fifteen.
        Sometimes I wish I could be 5 again....
        Offline

        2
        ReputationRep:
        It would be awful if the age of consent was 13. 13 year olds already think they can do whatever they want, without being told they are actually ALLOWED to.
       
       
       
    • See more of what you like on The Student Room

      You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

    • Poll
      Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
      Useful resources
    • See more of what you like on The Student Room

      You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

    • 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

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