What are 'the implications of sex'? Watch

Sophie's life is Average
Badges: 0
#21
Report 8 years ago
#21
I always think of the implications of sex to involve emotions as well as all the rest listed above. Sex can be viewed as highly intimate, a vulnerable time where you need to trust your partner completely. The nine year old is not mature enough to understand these emotional implications of sex, or ready to experience them - especially rejection. Girls might be more willing to admit to this than guys... :P
0
quote
reply
SpamBa
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#22
Report 8 years ago
#22
Possibilities...

Orgasms

Pregnancy / Children

STDs / AIDS

Emotional Hurt

A reputation

A relationship / Connection

The end of a friendship (shagging friends = BAD IDEA)
0
quote
reply
nolongerhearthemusic
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#23
Report 8 years ago
#23
(Original post by EskimoJo)
Oooh, interesting. Please elaborate. And if that's your answer, explain why you think it's wrong for a child who wants to have sex, to have sex?
I just think people justify their moralising (i.e., obsessing over when it is and isn't moral to have sex) by pointing out the "consequences" of sex. They pretend it's the consequences they care about, and not the sex itself.

It's not wrong for a child to have sex. It'd never be the child's fault. If there's an adult involved, the adult is wrong for taking advantage of the child's naivety.
0
quote
reply
EskimoJo
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#24
Report Thread starter 8 years ago
#24
(Original post by Sophie's life is Average)
I always think of the implications of sex to involve emotions as well as all the rest listed above. Sex can be viewed as highly intimate, a vulnerable time where you need to trust your partner completely. The nine year old is not mature enough to understand these emotional implications of sex, or ready to experience them - especially rejection. Girls might be more willing to admit to this than guys... :P
That's true. But when would you come to understand that? And why? If say, a 17 year old sleeps around or pulls every few weeks, do they understand the implications? If those were 'true' implications, surely people wouldn't be able to sleep around.
I would say, after a childhood of rejection and bullying from the people who used to be my friends, people I trusted, sex in childhood would not have held any surprises for me. Trust me, I knew/know all about rejection. Sex would have been a welcome achievement!
I kinda understand why an adult having sex with a child would be different, but what would be vastly wrong about making the law state that under 12s (say 9-12s) can have sex with people in their age group, 12-14s within theirs, 15-18s within theirs and 18+ with anyone older?
Please note, I'm not saying it should be encouraged, but permitted. Why not?
Last edited by EskimoJo; 8 years ago
0
quote
reply
SpamBa
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#25
Report 8 years ago
#25
(Original post by EskimoJo)
That's true. But when would you come to understand that? And why? If say, a 17 year old sleeps around or pulls every few weeks, do they understand the implications?
I would say, after a childhood of rejection and bullying from the people who used to be my friends, people I trusted, sex in childhood would not have held any surprises for me. Trust me, I knew/know all about rejection. Sex would have been a welcome achievement!
I kinda understand why an adult having sex with a child would be different, but what would be vastly wrong about making the law state that under 12s (say 9-12s) can have sex with people in their age group, 12-14s within theirs, 15-18s within theirs and 18+ with anyone older?
Please note, I'm not saying it should be encouraged, but permitted. Why not?
This is basically the law in Holland, though minimum age of consent is 12.
0
quote
reply
EskimoJo
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#26
Report Thread starter 8 years ago
#26
(Original post by SpamBa)
This is basically the law in Holland, though minimum age of consent is 12.
That makes sense to me. Yeah, it's a weird thought kids having sex and I'd like to hope that most wouldn't, but if some kid happens to be ready, then I think they should be allowed. :dontknow:
Maybe 9 is a bit low, but if a child has started puberty, they might have urges and hormonal and psychological changes. Why wait years upon years until they reach 16 because the state has decided it's impossible for them to understand and consent to sex before that?
0
quote
reply
nolongerhearthemusic
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#27
Report 8 years ago
#27
(Original post by EskimoJo)
I kinda understand why an adult having sex with a child would be different, but what would be vastly wrong about making the law state that under 12s (say 9-12s) can have sex with people in their age group, 12-14s within theirs, 15-18s within theirs and 18+ with anyone older?
Please note, I'm not saying it should be encouraged, but permitted. Why not?
Is it illegal for children to have sex with each other?
0
quote
reply
Sophie's life is Average
Badges: 0
#28
Report 8 years ago
#28
(Original post by EskimoJo)
That's true. But when would you come to understand that? And why? If say, a 17 year old sleeps around or pulls every few weeks, do they understand the implications? If those were 'true' implications, surely people wouldn't be able to sleep around.
I would say, after a childhood of rejection and bullying from the people who used to be my friends, people I trusted, sex in childhood would not have held any surprises for me. Trust me, I knew/know all about rejection. Sex would have been a welcome achievement!
I kinda understand why an adult having sex with a child would be different, but what would be vastly wrong about making the law state that under 12s (say 9-12s) can have sex with people in their age group, 12-14s within theirs, 15-18s within theirs and 18+ with anyone older?
Please note, I'm not saying it should be encouraged, but permitted. Why not?
I would argue that it is a true implication and that implications do not stop us from having sex. Many people are deeply adversely affected by sexual rejection but still continue to have sex in the hope that their next partner will be different.

We had a teacher at school who said that the age limit of sixteen was to stop 30 year olds having sex with fifteen year olds, rather than to stop sixteen year olds having sex with fifteen year olds... which I think is an interesting suggestion to put forward. If fifteen year olds are viewed as able to consent to sex with a sixteen year old, why shouldn't a fifteen year old be given the right to consent to sex with whomever they choose?

I would suggest that there should be an age limit because maturity is something that cannot be universallised. Just because one 12 year old may feel they could cope with the various implications of sex, the other 12 year old they may be having sex with might not be aware of them. Then, other implications would be an issue - like pregnancy and fatherhood. I'm not sure anyone can argue that 12 year olds on the whole are ready for complete responsibility for another person (though I do acknowledge that there are children who have to look after dependent relatives).
0
quote
reply
Psyk
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#29
Report 8 years ago
#29
(Original post by miss_perfectionist)
once you lose your virginity...there's no going back...
That's true of anything, not just sex. After being on a rollercoaster, I can't go back to the state of never having being on one. Why is sex singled out like that in people's minds?
0
quote
reply
miss_perfectionist
Badges: 0
#30
Report 8 years ago
#30
[QUOTE=EskimoJo]Is that the main thing? Do you think it's impossible for a child to understand this?[/QUOTE

Yeah i would say losing your virginity is a big deal...no nothing is impossible to understand if explained properly....
0
quote
reply
Psyk
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#31
Report 8 years ago
#31
(Original post by miss_perfectionist)
Yeah i would say losing your virginity is a big deal...no nothing is impossible to understand if explained properly....
But can you explain why it's such a big deal? Virginity is simply the mental state of not having experienced sex, so why is it more of a big deal than the mental state of not having experienced kissing?
0
quote
reply
birdsong1
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#32
Report 8 years ago
#32
Yeah, it's a really crappy justification; what about 20 year olds who really don't know the implications of sex or, as you've pointed out, the pregnant ones who clearly do?
0
quote
reply
humz2
Badges: 15
#33
Report 8 years ago
#33
If it's with a prostitute.....Fine, jail, STDs, a small chance of a baby being yours...:dontknow:
quote
reply
poupee-thedoll
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#34
Report 8 years ago
#34
I would say that it's not really a good idea for kids to have sex (even if they are the same age).

I mean an 11 year old can't understand the physical consequences:
It's already quite hard for a 17 year old to realise that the condom has split, have to take the morning after pill, there's a risks of STD...
And there are also the emotional consequences:
if sex happens in a relationship (not just a one night stand) it creates a special bond between the 2 people which is quite hard to break if the relationship was serious or if you are still young.


well that's just what I think
0
quote
reply
Cannonball
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#35
Report 8 years ago
#35
Love
0
quote
reply
miss_perfectionist
Badges: 0
#36
Report 8 years ago
#36
(Original post by Psyk)
But can you explain why it's such a big deal? Virginity is simply the mental state of not having experienced sex, so why is it more of a big deal than the mental state of not having experienced kissing?
virginity is something that is valued more, simply because when you have sex you 'lose' your virginity wheras when u kiss you don't 'lose' anything...
0
quote
reply
Psyk
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#37
Report 8 years ago
#37
(Original post by miss_perfectionist)
virginity is something that is valued more, simply because when you have sex you 'lose' your virginity wheras when u kiss you don't 'lose' anything...
But you don't actually lose anything when you have sex. The only difference is people have given it a word.
0
quote
reply
Vampyrcorn
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#38
Report 8 years ago
#38
The implications of sex are potentially far worse for a 12 yr old than they are for a 16 year old. If they get pregnant before they're physically ready it will mess up their bodies a lot more, and I find it unlikely that they'll take the same responsibility over their health during pregnancy that an older person would.

They won't be able to understand the emotional responsibility that comes with sex - even if, say, a 12 yr old is ready for sex and has come to understand how he/she will feel about it afterwards, he/she still needs to be understanding towards the person he/she sleeps with and how they will react to sex.. this level of empathy isn't something that young people always naturally have. I know that sounds patronising but it's true - younger people can't read people's emotions in the same way and really aren't as understanding and empathetic.

It's just a question of maturity. That's not to say that everyone 'understands the implications of sex' as they get older - you see it all the time, person x sleeps with person y and doesn't have any comprehension of how much they'll end up hurting person y if they don't call for a few days. Person y wasn't mature enough to realise how having sex would change their needs/feelings. Having sex puts you in a really vulnerable position, and even if you can handle this and enjoy it and take a healthy approach to sex, it can be really hard to take on the responsibility of how the person you're sleeping with is feeling. You need to know how you'll feel if you sleep with someone and then the relationship ends, that changes things. You need to understand how to care for the other person's needs. You have to be aware of pregnancy and STIs and how to deal with these. I sure as hell wasn't 'ready' for sex as a child.

If sex is normalised for young people, then more young people will do it. And they won't be mature enough to handle it. A huge number of teenagers aren't mature enough to handle it - look at how upset so many girls are when they lose their virginity in a drunk one night stand. It haunts them. So I doubt that a child would be any better.
0
quote
reply
miss_perfectionist
Badges: 0
#39
Report 8 years ago
#39
(Original post by Psyk)
But you don't actually lose anything when you have sex. The only difference is people have given it a word.
that may be so when it comes to a guy but when it comes to girls when they have sex their hymen is broken..so in that sense they do lose something....
0
quote
reply
Psyk
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#40
Report 8 years ago
#40
(Original post by miss_perfectionist)
that may be so when it comes to a guy but when it comes to girls when they have sex their hymen is broken..so in that sense they do lose something....
Plenty of girls break their hymen long before they ever have sex.
0
quote
reply
X

Reply to thread

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

Who is most responsible for your success at university

Mostly me (475)
91.52%
Mostly my university including my lecturers/tutors (44)
8.48%

Watched Threads

View All