What should the age of consent be?

[k-onmmunist]

Go.

[RosettaStoned]

13.

[Hatman 🍁]

Opebo response.

Consent should be deemed on a case by case basis.

[k-onmmunist]

Opebo response.

Consent should be deemed on a case by case basis.

Interesting answer, could you elaborate on it a bit?

[Psychic Octopus]

16 or 17, probably 16. Yeah, that's right, I hate freedom.

[k-onmmunist]

16 or 17, probably 16. Yeah, that's right, I hate freedom.

I see your point. I just think it shouldn't exist.

[Psychic Octopus]

16 or 17, probably 16. Yeah, that's right, I hate freedom.

I see your point. I just think it shouldn't exist.

In an ideal world, yeah, it shouldn't exist. Is it broken constantly? Yes. I just feel that it is needed at this particular point in time. It helps act as a safeguard between people, and children would be abused if this was removed. 

[k-onmmunist]

16 or 17, probably 16. Yeah, that's right, I hate freedom.

I see your point. I just think it shouldn't exist.

In an ideal world, yeah, it shouldn't exist. Is it broken constantly? Yes. I just feel that it is needed at this particular point in time. It helps act as a safeguard between people, and children would be abused if this was removed. 

There must be better ways to stop child abuse.

[Hatman 🍁]

Opebo response.

Consent should be deemed on a case by case basis.

Interesting answer, could you elaborate on it a bit?

Well, I believe age limits on anything are inherently arbitrary. Obviously there should be restrictions, but they should be deemed based on ability to consent and maturity levels, cohesion, state of mind, etc. Plus, the younger someone is, the more proof of consent would be required by a judge.  

[Psychic Octopus]

16 or 17, probably 16. Yeah, that's right, I hate freedom.

I see your point. I just think it shouldn't exist.

In an ideal world, yeah, it shouldn't exist. Is it broken constantly? Yes. I just feel that it is needed at this particular point in time. It helps act as a safeguard between people, and children would be abused if this was removed. 

There must be better ways to stop child abuse.

The problem is, is that a seven or eight year-old has much less knowledge then let's say, someone in their twenties.

ADULT: Hey Johnny, how old are you?

JOHNNY: 8

ADULT: Want to play a game?

JOHNNY: What's the game?

ADULT: It's called sex, it's a fun game that makes you feel good.

JOHNNY: Sure, how do you play?

ADULT: You learn as you play... I'll show you...


While this happens IRL, in a world with no age of consent, there'd be no punishment for this, as Johnny technically gave his consent. And if the adult was sent to jail for this, it would be ridiculous as what he did was technically legal and not rape since Johnny gave his consent.

Theres plenty of options to be worked out with Age of Consent laws, it's more complicated then it first appears.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

17 in general. However should be able to go down as far as 13 as long both people involved are no more than two or three years apart.

[Earth]

I support abolishing it.

[Marokai Backbeat]

As cute and rebellious it would be for me to say "Abolish it! Yeahh!!!! Liberty!!" and so on, I have to stay 16.

If we're talking about sex specifically, then 13. But due to the vague nature of what we're determining consent for, I have to vote as if this were for everything.

[Psychic Octopus]

17 in general. However should be able to go down as far as 13 as long both people involved are no more than two or three years apart.

[Psychic Octopus]

I echo some of the sentiments above me from Ghyl Tarvoke. I'd be open to, or at least turn a blind eye to, a system that allows it to be legal for people 14-17 to be able to have sex with each other.



However, I firmly stick to, and support my first post.

[k-onmmunist]

As cute and rebellious it would be for me to say "Abolish it! Yeahh!!!! Liberty!!" and so on, I have to stay 16.

If we're talking about sex specifically, then 13. But due to the vague nature of what we're determining consent for, I have to vote as if this were for everything.

You'd have a different age of consent for different sexual acts?

[Earth]

As cute and rebellious it would be for me to say "Abolish it! Yeahh!!!! Liberty!!" and so on, I have to stay 16.

Yeah, that's why I said it, to be cute and rebellious on the internet.

[Mechaman]

I support nothing less than the total and complete abolition of laws that allow parents to be lazyasses and make it easier for prosecutors to try people without thorough and concrete evidence. That and I hate moralf****try.

[Ebowed]

16 is fine.

Obviously, though, 16 year olds should not be prosecuted for having consensual sex with 15 year olds etc etc.

[opebo]

I voted for 'abolish it', of course, but I also voted for '12'.  By voting that way my intention was to say that while a case by case basis standard would be ideal, I have no great problem as a practical means of administration, with a blanket one size fits all rule as long as it allows for Nature:  i.e. puberty.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

I agree with the idea of abolishing a set "age of consent" and just judging this issue on a case-by-case basis. No two human beings will develop exactly alike. If an individual 14-year-old is mentally and physically developed enough to consent to sex with awareness of potential consequences, I don't see why some arbitrary limit should prevent him/her from exercising that freedom. Remember it was common not all that long ago for people to married at that age.

Today meanwhile there are people in their late teens, twenties, and beyond that are too immature and irresponsible to be having sex.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

16 is totally arbitrary, but all such lines will be and it seems to be an acceptable one (as in - not absurdly high and not low enough to cause certainly problems better off avoided. And also not low enough to offend against "public morality" - the Law ought to reflect, at least to an extent, social values and social norms, otherwise there's usually "trouble". I can't say that I like fourty year olds who prey on fourteen year olds, but that doesn't mean that I want them lynched). Of course the point of such laws should relate entirely to predatory behavior from people over it (ideally well over it), and not as a restriction on the sexual practices of teenagers - so sliding scales make some sense as well.

The danger of letting either judges or juries having much of a say on sex offences is that they tend to be dangerously prone to absurd and disgusting decisions (in both directions, I might add) although in different ways.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

I support abolishing it.

If not, at least 16.  Old enough to drive yet not old enough to make a decision about sex?  I don't think so.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

14-15

[Iosif is a COTHO]

16, but for goodness sake we need to inject some common sense into statutory rape laws. A 17 year old who has sex with a 15 year old is not a criminal.

The vast majority of people charged with sex crimes are just kids. It's obviously a flawed system. Keep the 16 limit, but don't take it so literally.