Debate talk:At what age should consensual sex be a crime?
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Child sexual abuse[edit]
Don't know about you but (and I know it's not the RW way) I'm tempted to block this guy if he pulls it again. I have a very low tolerance for child abuse apologists. Totnesmartin 06:33, 9 August 2008 (EDT)
- It is both disgusting and bizarre. --Arcan ¡ollǝɥ 06:35, 9 August 2008 (EDT)
- If he keeps it up we can also put the edit warring template on the article. If he continues then we can block him.{{Edit Warring}}--Bobbing up 07:52, 9 August 2008 (EDT)
- I've given him a warning on the article talk page. Totnesmartin 08:05, 9 August 2008 (EDT)
- Whether he's got a point to make or not - attempting to edit another user's edits is so far beyond acceptable activity that he's going to have some difficulty persuading anybody. Such an action also implies a belief that RW users are too dim to notice such duplicity. --Bobbing up 08:21, 9 August 2008 (EDT)
- I left a note to that effect on its talk page. A record is hard to escape on a wiki... Don't know about you folks, but when I see an IP making suspect edits I check their talk page and contribs for previous offenses. This one is pretty much out of credibility here. Hahahaahha, none of use named them, but we all know who we are talking about? ħuman
00:51, 10 August 2008 (EDT)
- I just wish to clarify. This guys edits seem interesting. Obviously a 45 year old guy having sex with a 7 year old is bad, but what about the statutory rape charges where a 17 year old girl has sex with a 19 year old guy? It would seem to me that one would be drastically different than the other, yet they're both illegal because of statutory rape. Thoughts? --
Gen. S.T. Shrink I can has rank? 00:56, 10 August 2008 (EDT)
- Or vice versa? There is that interesting quirk in the "age of consent" laws where sex is legal for two young idiots, at least one of whom is not allowed to date anyone older. Still, I see your point. What the analysis requires is not only maturity of perspective, but some sort of maturity of law? PS, in what state is the age of consent over 17??? Usually the story you are telling is a 15 yo with a 19 or 21 yo. Not much "age difference" (as if that's the crime), but creepy. Wanna start a debate page so BobM doesn't get rounded up for our little chat and inquisited, harshly, with a dish rack? ħuman 01:33, 10 August 2008
- Or vice versa? There is that interesting quirk in the "age of consent" laws where sex is legal for two young idiots, at least one of whom is not allowed to date anyone older. Still, I see your point. What the analysis requires is not only maturity of perspective, but some sort of maturity of law? PS, in what state is the age of consent over 17??? Usually the story you are telling is a 15 yo with a 19 or 21 yo. Not much "age difference" (as if that's the crime), but creepy. Wanna start a debate page so BobM doesn't get rounded up for our little chat and inquisited, harshly, with a dish rack? ħuman
- I just wish to clarify. This guys edits seem interesting. Obviously a 45 year old guy having sex with a 7 year old is bad, but what about the statutory rape charges where a 17 year old girl has sex with a 19 year old guy? It would seem to me that one would be drastically different than the other, yet they're both illegal because of statutory rape. Thoughts? --
- I left a note to that effect on its talk page. A record is hard to escape on a wiki... Don't know about you folks, but when I see an IP making suspect edits I check their talk page and contribs for previous offenses. This one is pretty much out of credibility here. Hahahaahha, none of use named them, but we all know who we are talking about? ħuman
- Whether he's got a point to make or not - attempting to edit another user's edits is so far beyond acceptable activity that he's going to have some difficulty persuading anybody. Such an action also implies a belief that RW users are too dim to notice such duplicity. --Bobbing up 08:21, 9 August 2008 (EDT)
- I've given him a warning on the article talk page. Totnesmartin 08:05, 9 August 2008 (EDT)
- If he keeps it up we can also put the edit warring template on the article. If he continues then we can block him.{{Edit Warring}}--Bobbing up 07:52, 9 August 2008 (EDT)
(EDT)
- I considered it, but "Is child sexual abuse okay" seemed a tad.....weird. Th age of consent is 18 everywhere, or so I thought. I have several friends who are minors who do have sex with majors, all of the minors are intelligent and mature enough to make their own choices. I think that most statutory rape laws do confirm to the edits the IP made, although being the devils advocate can make people think you support child rapists walking, and statutory and child rape are two totally different things. Laws that put a 19 year old in jail for fooling around with a 17 don't make any sense in my opinion. Which is why To Catch a Predator is a flawed show, being that those cops start a lot of their conversations. But to clarify child sex is wrong. But a 17 year old and a 19 year old isn't, in my opinion. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink I can has rank? 01:38, 10 August 2008 (EDT)
- Re: the 17 and 19 yo thing, that surely should not be a crime. Re: age of consent, in this state it's 16, as it is in MA. Re: That crappy TV show, since there is no victim, how can there be a crime? I know the trapped "predators" are not exactly sympathetic characters, but there is NO FUCKING VICTIM in these entrapment schemes, and I think they should be judicially overseen somehow. The TV show is the crime, actually, IMHO. ħuman 01:51, 10 August 2008 (EDT)
- To get this off my talk page, how about moving to: DEBATE: At what age should consensual sex be a crime? . Or is that too loaded?--Bobbing up 05:08, 10 August 2008 (EDT)
- Anything indeed. You are already under investigation, and this sure isn't helping. Move it wherever you want, I'd suggest [[Andrew Schlafly:Why I teach high school girls and I am smart and funny and I rulzorz!]] Just an idea. Oops, did I violate the boycott by saying that? ħuman 05:15, 10 August 2008 (EDT)
- Anything indeed. You are already under investigation, and this sure isn't helping. Move it wherever you want, I'd suggest [[Andrew Schlafly:Why I teach high school girls and I am smart and funny and I rulzorz!]] Just an idea. Oops, did I violate the boycott by saying that? ħuman
- To get this off my talk page, how about moving to: DEBATE: At what age should consensual sex be a crime? . Or is that too loaded?--Bobbing up 05:08, 10 August 2008 (EDT)
- Re: the 17 and 19 yo thing, that surely should not be a crime. Re: age of consent, in this state it's 16, as it is in MA. Re: That crappy TV show, since there is no victim, how can there be a crime? I know the trapped "predators" are not exactly sympathetic characters, but there is NO FUCKING VICTIM in these entrapment schemes, and I think they should be judicially overseen somehow. The TV show is the crime, actually, IMHO. ħuman
- I considered it, but "Is child sexual abuse okay" seemed a tad.....weird. Th age of consent is 18 everywhere, or so I thought. I have several friends who are minors who do have sex with majors, all of the minors are intelligent and mature enough to make their own choices. I think that most statutory rape laws do confirm to the edits the IP made, although being the devils advocate can make people think you support child rapists walking, and statutory and child rape are two totally different things. Laws that put a 19 year old in jail for fooling around with a 17 don't make any sense in my opinion. Which is why To Catch a Predator is a flawed show, being that those cops start a lot of their conversations. But to clarify child sex is wrong. But a 17 year old and a 19 year old isn't, in my opinion. --
Age of Consent outside the US[edit]
Well, I gather many of those discussing this are in the US, so they're used to the whole 18 years old gig, but it is a bit different elsewhere. I'd be interested in knowing what it is in other places.
Here in Canada, it's a bit weird. I researched it some years ago, so I'm not 100% sure it hasn't changed, but I think it's still set up as a three-tier system. Child is up to the day before the 14th birthday, "young person" is 14 to the day before the 18th birthday, and adult is after that. Obviously "child" is no sex and "adult" is whatever you like without coercion, but the interaction between the groups is fuzzy. For instance, a "young person" could have consensual sex with someone two years younger. So conceivably, a 14-year-old could have sex with a 12-year-old. Also, an adult could have sex with a "young person" provided consent and there was no "relationship of trust or responsibility", which meant no relatives, youth group leaders, scout leaders, teachers, etc., or anyone who provided material support to the "young person". So complicated to be sure, although there's been talk of raising the low end up to 16 lately.
How about others? --Kels 14:26, 10 August 2008 (EDT)
- Well, here in Dipshit, Alabama, it's also a bit like that. First degree rape is "He or she, being 16 years or older, engages in sexual intercourse with a member of the opposite sex who is less than 12 years old." Second degree is "Being 16 years old or older, he or she engages in sexual intercourse with a member of the opposite sex less than 16 and more than 12 years old; provided, however, the actor is at least two years older than the member of the opposite sex." Sodomy is "He, being 16 years old or older, engages in deviate sexual intercourse with a person who is less than 12 years old." Deviant seuxal intercourse means in the butt or mouth, and thanks to LvT, that aint illegal. Second degree sodomy is "He, being 16 years old or older, engages in deviate sexual intercourse with another person less than 16 and more than 12 years old." The age of consent is essentially 16, and is protected by all the coersion things, "or with her consent where consent was obtained by the use of any fraud or artifice", but it is very different for those with the penis than those with the vajayjay. Then there's a lot of stuff dealing with lewdity and random stuff. You can find it here. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink I can has rank? 14:34, 10 August 2008 (EDT)
- That reminds me, all that above for Canada is for heterosexual relations. For sodomy, the age of consent's always been 18, and no butts (heh) about it. Which is why the whole consent thing is such a big issue in the queer community here in the capital. --Kels 14:50, 10 August 2008 (EDT)
- I understand that in Spain it's 13, as long as there is no coercion. But "coercion" is defined very broadly - giving money or gifts would be coercion for instance. There some other restrictions as well I think.--Bobbing up 14:59, 10 August 2008 (EDT)
- From what I can tell, there is very little to no leeway for minors to engage in sexual activity in the USA or UK, whether they are mature enough or not. In Australia, the laws are somewhat different to the straight "illegal until 16 or 18" laws. For anyone between 12 and 18, there is a 2 year bracket with whom you can have sex with consensually, people below 12 excluded. A 14 and 16 year old can have sex, provided that there is less than a 2 year age gap and all parties consent. However, a 15 y/o and an 18 y/o cannot engage in sexual activity, but can be defended if the 18 y/o genuinely believed that the younger person was 16 or older. For 16/17 y/o's, if the other person is above 18, they must not be in a position of care or responsibility. TheIslander 14:57, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
- In Germany it's 16, or 14 with her parents' permission. Because so many people are going to ask, "Herr and Frau Schmidt, may I deflower your 14 year old daughter?"--Fergus Mason Thruppence I got for selling my coat, tuppence for selling my blanket. If ever I 'list for a soldier again, the Devil shall be my Sergeant. 15:18, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
- From what I can tell, there is very little to no leeway for minors to engage in sexual activity in the USA or UK, whether they are mature enough or not. In Australia, the laws are somewhat different to the straight "illegal until 16 or 18" laws. For anyone between 12 and 18, there is a 2 year bracket with whom you can have sex with consensually, people below 12 excluded. A 14 and 16 year old can have sex, provided that there is less than a 2 year age gap and all parties consent. However, a 15 y/o and an 18 y/o cannot engage in sexual activity, but can be defended if the 18 y/o genuinely believed that the younger person was 16 or older. For 16/17 y/o's, if the other person is above 18, they must not be in a position of care or responsibility. TheIslander 14:57, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
- I understand that in Spain it's 13, as long as there is no coercion. But "coercion" is defined very broadly - giving money or gifts would be coercion for instance. There some other restrictions as well I think.--Bobbing up 14:59, 10 August 2008 (EDT)
- That reminds me, all that above for Canada is for heterosexual relations. For sodomy, the age of consent's always been 18, and no butts (heh) about it. Which is why the whole consent thing is such a big issue in the queer community here in the capital. --Kels 14:50, 10 August 2008 (EDT)
- Well, here in Dipshit, Alabama, it's also a bit like that. First degree rape is "He or she, being 16 years or older, engages in sexual intercourse with a member of the opposite sex who is less than 12 years old." Second degree is "Being 16 years old or older, he or she engages in sexual intercourse with a member of the opposite sex less than 16 and more than 12 years old; provided, however, the actor is at least two years older than the member of the opposite sex." Sodomy is "He, being 16 years old or older, engages in deviate sexual intercourse with a person who is less than 12 years old." Deviant seuxal intercourse means in the butt or mouth, and thanks to LvT, that aint illegal. Second degree sodomy is "He, being 16 years old or older, engages in deviate sexual intercourse with another person less than 16 and more than 12 years old." The age of consent is essentially 16, and is protected by all the coersion things, "or with her consent where consent was obtained by the use of any fraud or artifice", but it is very different for those with the penis than those with the vajayjay. Then there's a lot of stuff dealing with lewdity and random stuff. You can find it here. --
75[edit]
After that it's just gross. --Toiretni 14:47, 10 August 2008 (EDT)
Is our mission really furthered ...[edit]
...by a debate of this nature? It's creepy at best, and I don't see it doing much to debunk religion, pseudoscience, fundamentalism or woo... PowderSmokeAndLeather: Say something once, why say it again?.
00:58, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
- The crank magnetism is strong on this page. If it were up to me, I'd flush it without regret. Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 02:30, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
- Totally agree with PowderSmokeAndLeather and Sprocket J Cogswell. I'd vote to delete this. Refugeetalk page 07:13, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
- Alright. Take me to the Coop or something if you really want to consider this sort of conversation. PowderSmokeAndLeather: Say something once, why say it again?. 17:02, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
- Alright. Take me to the Coop or something if you really want to consider this sort of conversation. PowderSmokeAndLeather: Say something once, why say it again?.
- Totally agree with PowderSmokeAndLeather and Sprocket J Cogswell. I'd vote to delete this. Refugeetalk page 07:13, 17 November 2013 (UTC)