What Should The Age of Consent Be?

[minionofmidas]

Roman Law (12) or onset of puberty. With exceptions for "abusive" relationships (not just talking actual non-violent rape stuff, that's kind of a given) with high burden of proof.

[greenforest32]

14 + gender equalization (i.e. 14 for both genders)

I hate to break it to you guys but young teenagers masturbate and have sex.

Deal with it.

[Mechaman]

Roman Law (12) or onset of puberty. With exceptions for "abusive" relationships (not just talking actual non-violent rape stuff, that's kind of a given) with high burden of proof.

Yeah, this sounds like something I would support.

[Sewer]

I love the hypocrisy in this thread.

As for the age of consent...........how does NONE sound?

do you  babies bro

[Franzl]

18

Although:

-no penalty if both under 18
-no penalty if one person over 18 as long as they're...say...within 5 years of each other

[Antonio the Sixth]

I'd say 16.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

16, with an exception that says a 16 year old and a 15-13 year old are allowed to get it on.

[courts]

18, unless both involved are within two years of age. But it should really only apply to men, MILFs can f**k all the underage boys (or girls if they are lesbian) they want, even if they are that kid's teacher.

Also no marriage should be recognized if the man's age is greater than double the woman's/other man's age minus seven years. Older women can still marry young guys though, and lesbians can marry whatever. But no one under 18 can be married under absolutely any circumstances whatsoever.

But then you couldn't get any, because as this post clearly indicates there's no way you're older than 14.

[Del Tachi]

18.

Sex is for adults.  Therefore, one must be an adult before he/she can consent to sex.

If the age of consent is to be lower than 18 (let's say 16), then I guess 16 year old's should be able to appear in pornography?

[Link]

I love the hypocrisy in this thread.

As for the age of consent...........how does NONE sound?

Like a recipe for disaster.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I suppose the name could be changed from "age of consent."  Or perhaps the "age of consent" could be set at 14 and there could be a different categories for older girls.  Even if a girl gives her consent there needs to be some type of law in place to prevent a 22 year old male from having sex with a 16 year old girl.

Hmm that's odd, so you're pretty much implying that only girls can get raped or taken advantage of?
I'm sorry, but the type of suggestion you and others are advancing is pure blatant sexism.  Only grown women should be able to have sex with people underage?  I mean really, how is that not inconsistent logic?
Also, what about the half of the million who are not in their twenties or older who do get teenage girls pregnant?  Why is it so important for you to focus on the guys who are over 20 who happen to be the father in teenage pregnancies anyway?  I mean considering that "half" of the million pregnancies are over 20 and the age range you're talking about girls is ages 15-17 that means that there are about as much (give or take on the half) guys in the age range of 11-19 who are knocking up the teenage girls as the OVER 20 crowd.  I could possibly understand a guy who is like 40 but a 22 year old having sex with a 16 year old?  Really dude?
Also, in your own quoted source it is mentioned that "many", not just a few, of the girls have sex willingly with older men.  It only mentions that "others are doing it against their will", kind of like how in Russia there are women who are having sex against their will or how there are some Hispanic women having sex against their will.  Maybe we should create laws preventing men from having sex with women in Russia or Hispanic women?

Fact: Guys mature slower than girls.  If anything a 22 year old male having sex with a 16 year old girl is *gasp* more natural than a 22 year old female having sex with a 16 year old boy.  That is NATURE, not my own personal bias talking.  But of course like I mentioned earlier I'm in favor of consistent and equal enforcement of laws, not the "feel-good" method.

EDIT: Just realized I made booboo in original post.
EDIT: Yeah, double booboo.
EDIT: Reworded some of the post after I realized it might come off a little too harsh.

I'm a male and over the age of 22.  When I was 22 I was a college graduate wearing a suit and tie to work at a very demanding job.  There is NO WAY I would be able to have any kind of intelligent conversation with a 16 year old girl.  I really don't know where people get these ideas from.  Actually I wouldn't have even known where to meet 16 year old girls.  Let me be clear.  A 22 year old dating or having sex with a 16 year old in modern society is weird and unacceptable.

A few things...
1)  There is not an epidemic of older women having sex with underage boys and becoming pregnant.  That is a rare occurrence.  And if the woman who should know better does get pregnant then I don't think the underage kid should be financially responsible.
2)  As I stated most of the age restrictions I advocate for are to prevent teenage girls from getting pregnant.  I would be perfectly willing to lose the vote of the 22 year old guys that are pissed off they can't inseminate 16 year olds.  Trust me.  I can live with that.
3)  People are human.  I understand that.  If two ignorant teenagers have sex and the girl gets pregnant I wouldn't punish either of them.  That problem needs to be combated with more and better sex ed, not jail time.

[Link]

18.

Sex is for adults.  Therefore, one must be an adult before he/she can consent to sex.

If the age of consent is to be lower than 18 (let's say 16), then I guess 16 year old's should be able to appear in pornography?

I assume then that you think the legal drinking age should be 18.

[Del Tachi]

18.

Sex is for adults.  Therefore, one must be an adult before he/she can consent to sex.

If the age of consent is to be lower than 18 (let's say 16), then I guess 16 year old's should be able to appear in pornography?

I assume then that you think the legal drinking age should be 18.

Yes I do.  But, I think drinking age laws should be a state issue.

[courts]

I'm a male and over the age of 22.  When I was 22 I was a college graduate wearing a suit and tie to work at a very demanding job.  There is NO WAY I would be able to have any kind of intelligent conversation with a 16 year old girl.  I really don't know where people get these ideas from.  Actually I wouldn't have even known where to meet 16 year old girls.  Let me be clear.  A 22 year old dating or having sex with a 16 year old in modern society is weird and unacceptable.

It may not be the most socially acceptable thing, but it's certainly not unheard of or even illegal in my state or a bunch of other ones. And obviously a lot of men couldn't care less about having an 'intelligent conversation' regardless of what their partner's age is. But let's put all that aside for a moment and acknowledge the facts: By the time you're 16 you're legally able to legally drive, work to varying extents, choose whether you want to continue your education and do a bunch of other very adult things. What makes deciding to have sex any more dangerous than that? Personally I'd be way more concerned about some dumb 16-17 year old girl mowing me over because she was texting in her hyundai on the highway than her giving a blow job to her 25 year old boyfriend.

[opebo]

Been a while since we've had this poll.  It is at least encouraging that the majority are supporting 16 or under.  Of course I voted 'none', but I wouldn't find something in the 12-15 range impractical at all, since it would recognize physical and social realities.

[Link]

I'm a male and over the age of 22.  When I was 22 I was a college graduate wearing a suit and tie to work at a very demanding job.  There is NO WAY I would be able to have any kind of intelligent conversation with a 16 year old girl.  I really don't know where people get these ideas from.  Actually I wouldn't have even known where to meet 16 year old girls.  Let me be clear.  A 22 year old dating or having sex with a 16 year old in modern society is weird and unacceptable.

It may not be the most socially acceptable thing, but it's certainly not unheard of or even illegal in my state or a bunch of other ones. And obviously a lot of men couldn't care less about having an 'intelligent conversation' regardless of what their partner's age is. But let's put all that aside for a moment and acknowledge the facts: By the time you're 16 you're legally able to legally drive, work to varying extents, choose whether you want to continue your education and do a bunch of other very adult things. What makes deciding to have sex any more dangerous than that? Personally I'd be way more concerned about some dumb 16-17 year old girl mowing me over because she was texting in her hyundai on the highway than her giving a blow job to her 25 year old boyfriend.

You should be concerned about older men having sex with 16 year olds.  They are disproportionately responsible for teenage pregnancy and out of wedlock mothers.  They are the breeders of the welfare recipients and criminals of tomorrow.  This affects all of us.  I'm all for certain libertarian ideals, but what bothers me about libertarians and a lot of Republicans is fighting the government "just 'cause."  No one is going to convince me that politely asking a 25 year old man not to stick his genitals into a 16 year old girl places an undo burden on society.

[courts]

The problem is people's expectations of government (i.e. role of government) not people's lifestyle choices in this case. You're not going to fix that by trying to impose age restrictions that really don't have much historical precedent and are widely ignored by people even in the states they do apply. And what about all the 20 somethings that are responsible and have younger partners? One of my sisters met her husband when she was 16 and he was enlisted, and they're doing fine.

[Link]

The problem is people's expectations of government (i.e. role of government) not people's lifestyle choices in this case. You're not going to fix that by trying to impose age restrictions that really don't have much historical precedent and are widely ignored by people even in the states they do apply. And what about all the 20 somethings that are responsible and have younger partners? One of my sisters met her husband when she was 16 and he was enlisted, and they're doing fine.

In my state and many others they do have historical precedent.

You left out numerous critical facts from your anecdotal story.
1) What was the age difference between the 16 year old and the man
2) Were they just dating or were they having sex when she was 16
3) Define "fine"

People can smoke and live till 90 years old.  That doesn't mean the government shouldn't discourage smokers.  NO scientific study has proven that girls initiating sexual activity at 16 with men almost ten years older than them is a good idea.  You will definitely find some people that will cite anecdotal cases that they think turned out "fine."  But I don't know any metric that shows that this practice is a good idea for society in general.

[courts]

He was about 7 years older, so 23 or so. And they're living fairly comfortably off his paycheck while she searches for a job and goes to university far away from here. Of course that could change fast with this sort of economy, but she's substantially better off than 90% of the 20 year olds around here (except maybe the ones in a trade) I can tell you that much. And when I say historical precedent, I'm speaking more broadly because obviously human beings living nearly this long is a total aberration so Ephebophilia was the norm most of our history and is still hardwired in a lot of us. Really thinking of a 16 year old as a 'child' is something people would have laughed at less than 100 years ago.

[Hatman 🍁]

Consent should be determined on a case by case basis, with a high burden of proof for extreme cases (half plus 7 rule, perhaps).

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I think 16 is fine... but if both are over 14 but under 16 - then that should fly as well.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I think 16 is fine... but if both are over 14 but under 16 - then that should fly as well.

[opebo]

Consent should be determined on a case by case basis, with a high burden of proof for extreme cases (half plus 7 rule, perhaps).

Please clarify - by the above statement I could be prosecuted for whim-whamming a worn out woman in her late twenties with a thrice-burst seed-pod!

[Salaz]

15 or 16. And it should be the same for EVERYONE. None of this bullsh**t Romeo & Juliet Laws!

[TheGlobalizer]

US law picks too many arbitrary thresholds.  I vote none.

[Frodo]

18, unless both involved are within two years of age. But it should really only apply to men, MILFs can f**k all the underage boys (or girls if they are lesbian) they want, even if they are that kid's teacher.

Also no marriage should be recognized if the man's age is greater than double the woman's/other man's age minus seven years. Older women can still marry young guys though, and lesbians can marry whatever. But no one under 18 can be married under absolutely any circumstances whatsoever.

DAMN!!! Are you a MILF or just a MILF fetishist?

He's not the only one here with an MILF fetish.....   

Really, it makes more sense that way.  The older a woman is, the greater her sexual appetite -so it matches up well with giddy male teenagers and tweens.