Barrister says age of consent should be 13

[Chris_Sleeps]

There is a good reason for a legal age of consent and if anything, it should be older than 16, not higher.

Why is 16 the wrong age for 'consent'? Will be people be more able to consent at 17, or 18, or 19?

Do you honestly think that a 13 year old single or couple) is mentally stable enough to look after a child, independently??

No.

 

Equally, I don't think a 16 year old is in that great of a position to look after a child. I know 20+ year olds who shouldn't be having kids, but that's my moral judgement. It's no basis for law.

Today's children have extended childhoods, they grow up slower and mature (mentally) at a much older age.

This is a crass history of childhood. At what age did children in the 17th century "mature mentally"?

Today's 13 year olds' are still learning and playing; not on their hands and knees in the cotton mills!

There'll be some people on here who are grieving that children aren't in the cotton mills - the idle little swines!!

Any of you on here who have children, particularly daughters; would you be happy to let her go out at 13, with a condom in her handbag, knowing that she was planning on shagging the chav down the road??

Emotive use of language, and has very little to do with consent. If she was going to have sex with anyone, I'd be happy that she had the sense to use a condom.

And for those of you that are saying "what's the difference between sex at 16 and at 15 years old?"....Well, lets reduce the age to 13, then what would be the difference between having sex at 12 or 11??

Indeed. What is the difference?

 

To clarify my point, I think 16 is a reasonable age for consent to be valid. Policing that law needs a mountain of common sense.

 

To make my own judgement too - I wish people would wait for somebody that they really love, which takes time. The chastity movement I find a little too puritan, and there is nothing attractive in sleeping around at 14 - male or female. Ain't life complex?

[MrSmith]

Thank you mort

 

---------- Post added 10-05-2013 at 11:47 ----------

 

 

Hold on!

Ive been slagged off for what ive wrote.

Ive been accused of having more than one account.

Ive been called names.

But this is a good one, now im being had a go at for something i DIDNT say???

Theres a word for all this.

Bullying!!

That’s not unusual for SF.

[RootsBooster]

People just love taking things out of context on here!

 

If you're talking about me, can you explain exactly how I've taken your comments out of context?

[Bonzo77]

If you're talking about me, can you explain exactly how I've taken your comments out of context?

 

Wasn't talking about you.

[alchresearch]

Sexual abuse isn't an every day situation. Why try to liken it to an every day situation?

 

The NSPCC's statistics say otherwise:

 

http://www.nspcc.org.uk/Inform/resourcesforprofessionals/sexualabuse/statistics_wda87833.html

[Bonzo77]

Why is 16 the wrong age for 'consent'? Will be people be more able to consent at 17, or 18, or 19?

 

On the whole, yes. They will definitely be in a better frame of mind to be able to bring up children, should they get caught pregnent.

 

 

Equally, I don't think a 16 year old is in that great of a position to look after a child. I know 20+ year olds who shouldn't be having kids, but that's my moral judgement. It's no basis for law.

 

A 16 year old can get a job and start looking to provide for a child. A 13 year old would need to funded by their family.

 

As for the 20 year olds, I know what you mean, but in general, the older you get, the more financially stable you become and the better equip you are for bringing up children.

 

This is a crass history of childhood. At what age did children in the 17th century "mature mentally"?

 

I don't know, but they had to work for a living and were therefore taught the values of day to day life at a much younger stage.

 

There'll be some people on here who are grieving that children aren't in the cotton mills - the idle little swines!!

 

Agreed

 

Emotive use of language, and has very little to do with consent. If she was going to have sex with anyone, I'd be happy that she had the sense to use a condom.

 

People at 16 can't be trusted to use contraception, what makes you think a 13 year old would?

 

Indeed. What is the difference?

 

To clarify my point, I think 16 is a reasonable age for consent to be valid. Policing that law needs a mountain of common sense.

 

To make my own judgement too - I wish people would wait for somebody that they really love, which takes time. The chastity movement I find a little too puritan, and there is nothing attractive in sleeping around at 14 - male or female. Ain't life complex?

 

So you don't think there should be an age for connect at all?

 

---------- Post added 10-05-2013 at 13:29 ----------

 

The NSPCC's statistics say otherwise:

 

http://www.nspcc.org.uk/Inform/resourcesforprofessionals/sexualabuse/statistics_wda87833.html

 

Of cause it happens every day, so does death and birth, but they are once in a lifetime occurrences for an individual. Did you not understand what I meant by 'not an every day situation'??

[harvey19]

The majority don't get their day in court or get to see justice for the crimes committed against them. In my experience, this is one of the biggest obstacles to healing. Many have the horrors of ongoing vulnerability (and even assaults) of having to see (and even live with) their rapist on a regular basis which is extremely traumatic. PTSD is quite common.

 

I think you are getting to the crux of the matter here.

It is the sense of injustice and "why me" that causes the problem.

[MrSmith]

Quote of the day!!

 

I’m looking forward to reading your explanation as to how gay sex as anything to do with making a baby.

 

---------- Post added 10-05-2013 at 13:33 ----------

 

A 16 year old can get a job and start looking to provide for a child. A 13 year old would need to funded by their family.

 

As for the 20 year olds, I know what you mean, but in general, the older you get, the more financially stable you become and the better equip you are for bringing up children.

Wouldn't an older partner solve that little dilemma.

[mikem8634]

Let me stop you there.

Im no longer a victim, i was but ive got over it and moved on with my life.

Its something that happened to me that i was determined to not let colour my life.

It hasn't so no, im not a victim

 

---------- Post added 10-05-2013 at 10:57 ----------

 

 

You can call them that if you like.

I dont like so i wont.

 

Well done, that certainly sounds as though you have carried on despite trauma and hardship, you could say that you have persevered.

 

 

sur·vive (sr-vv)

v. sur·vived, sur·viv·ing, sur·vives

v.intr.

1. To remain alive or in existence.

2. To carry on despite hardships or trauma; persevere:

3. To remain functional or usable:

 

[Bonzo77]

I’m looking forward to reading your explanation as to how gay sex as anything to do with making a baby.

 

---------- Post added 10-05-2013 at 13:33 ----------

 

Wouldn't an older partner solve that little dilemma.

 

That's not what you said. You said SEX has nothing to do with making babies.

 

The simple act of sex is connected with making babies. We have a compulsion to breed, all animals do. It's nature. Whether you are attracted to males or females has nothing to do with it.