This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Do you believe an age of sexual consent should exist?

Following on from this thread: http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=1349714

In response to my question whether an age of consent should exist:

Do you believe in having an age of sexual consent, or do you think that children at any age should be 'tested' to see whether they are ready to engage in sexual activity with another child or an adult?

Reply 1

rrahimer

10

Way too complicated to follow through with, and anyone tring to bring the system in would be accused of being a paedophile.

Although I agree that the age of consent is almost completely arbitrary.

Reply 2

Connor132

7

I agree with it in principle, but I doubt that it would be possible to actually develop a test that isn't flawed in someway (plus it would be expensive) and people don't listen to the law (regarding consent now) so it would be kinda pointless. Also how would you know if the person you're with has passed? Make some sort of sex licence?

The age is also based on the biological side (is there body developed enough) as well as the ability to give consent - no doubt you'll get some 8 y/o genius passing.

Reply 3

ByronicHero

20

An age of consent is arbitrary and presumptuous so I don't support it as such but I'm yet to see a better idea.

Reply 4

xmarilynx

18

I think there should be an age of consent. It's completely impractical for there to be special tests for it, and there's a world of difference between knowing about STIs etc and actually being ready for sex. I mean, judging by the suggested questions for the test in the OP, I could have passed it aged 11, but was most definitely not ready for sex. Under 16 is too young to know whether you're ready or not, much as you may think you are at the time. The age of consent exists for a reason - to protect children who are too immature to be able to consent, and no amount of sex lessons or whatever is going to change that, as it only comes with time and life experience.

Reply 5

Liam_G

14

I would see that resulting in somewhat of a leniency towards paedophilia charges... An "I thought she'd been tested" sort of thing.

Also, if there was such a test to calculate sexual maturity i'd say more than half of the young people would have to remain virgins for the rest of their lives (there isn't very many mature young people in this country :o:

)

Reply 6

Dude Where's My Username

15

What a stupid idea. Keep it at 16. Of course a 12 year old would nearly always say yes. That doesn't mean they're smart enough to understand what they're agreeing to. And testing?! Utterly ridiculous proposition

Reply 7

Qoph

booraad

Following on from this thread: http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=1349714

In response to my question whether an age of consent should exist:

Do you believe in having an age of sexual consent, or do you think that children at any age should be 'tested' to see whether they are ready to engage in sexual activity with another child or an adult?

The age of sexual consent was not introduced to prevent children from having sexual intercourse, it was rather made to prevent adults to have sex with childen.

Reply 8

Dude Where's My Username

15

paddy__power

An age of consent is arbitrary and presumptuous so I don't support it as such but I'm yet to see a better idea.

You're suggesting they picked "16" out the air when choosing an age of consent then? :eyeball:

Reply 9

basketofsnakes

yes because I'm not a pedophile

Reply 10

cookiecrisp

I can understand the test idea in theory but its unlikely to work, especially on a grand scale. I doubt someone pulling out a certificate saying 'I'm certified to have sex' is going to be popular and that most people will continue to do without it anyway. Plus as someone said,just knowing the stuff at like 12 doesn't mean you should be pressumed ready for sex, and also men mature slower than women mainly, what will us women do :wink:

jks lol

No

So basically we need to instate a sex licence? Would you have to either take a homosexual or heterosexual licence? Like a manual driving licence and an automatic licence.

Reply 13

fayebsy

xmarilynx

I think there should be an age of consent. It's completely impractical for there to be special tests for it, and there's a world of difference between knowing about STIs etc and actually being ready for sex. I mean, judging by the suggested questions for the test in the OP, I could have passed it aged 11, but was most definitely not ready for sex. Under 16 is too young to know whether you're ready or not, much as you may think you are at the time. The age of consent exists for a reason - to protect children who are too immature to be able to consent, and no amount of sex lessons or whatever is going to change that, as it only comes with time and life experience.

So when you go to bed at 15 you can't know if you're ready, but you can when you wake up at 16 on your birthday? Not saying you're wrong I just find the 'one day you're not ready, the next you are' thing a bit weird.

I think there needs to be an age for sexual consent, sexual abuse of children would definitely increase - so I don't disagree with you there at all.

Reply 14

ByronicHero

20

Dude Where's My Username

You're suggesting they picked "16" out the air when choosing an age of consent then? :eyeball:

No, but it wasn't much better.

Reply 15

moregano

18

It's the lesser of two evils, imo. It may be presumptuous, and it may be infringing on people's liberties, but better that than leave vulnerable children to make bad mistakes or be taken advantage of.

Reply 16

niall c

Dude Where's My Username

You're suggesting they picked "16" out the air when choosing an age of consent then? :eyeball:

In effect. The age of consent was raised from 13 to 16 in 1885 in response to mindless tabloid-created public uproar over the non-existent practice of 'white slavery'. It was the first tabloid witch hunt, from what I've read: Stead, the editor of the Pall Mall Gazette, decided to prove white slavery was happening by kidnapping a girl and then posing as her saviour.

So, in effect, there are two points. Firstly, the age's raising had nothing to do with fumbling teens, but rather the largely imaginary threat of kidnapping paedophiles (much like today, alas). Secondly, more broadly, we should suspect the motives of those that pose as the barometers of morality - that great press of ours. Paedos are on every corner! The drugs that we don't approve of and tax are evil! Britain's full!

Also, could you change the title of this thread? I don't give a **** what anyone believes about this; I want to know what (and if) they think.

Yes.

why not have a test to see if you are ready to drink alcoohol own a gun or buy cigarettes. That would be a massive waste of gouvernment money that is allready at a premium. This thread is stupid. There needs to be an age of consent to stop peodophiles. Not the rape a baby kind but the kind of 25 year olds who can impress 14 and 15 year olds with there money where they cant get girls of there own age.

Reply 19

xmarilynx

18

fayebsy

So when you go to bed at 15 you can't know if you're ready, but you can when you wake up at 16 on your birthday? Not saying you're wrong I just find the 'one day you're not ready, the next you are' thing a bit weird.

I think there needs to be an age for sexual consent, sexual abuse of children would definitely increase - so I don't disagree with you there at all.

I know what you mean, the system is certainly flawed as some people are more mature and self-aware at 15 than others are at 16 or even older, and it's debatable as to how much people mature between 15 and 16...

I guess there needs to be a cut off point somewhere, and although people mature at different rates you have to go with the majority.

Do you believe an age of sexual consent should exist?

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you