Barrister says age of consent should be 13

[MrSmith]

As your calls to lower the age of consent are nothing more than arbitrary you're just being hypocritical in calling the present law arbitrary. Any law would be arbitrary.

 

 

A lower age isn't arbitrary; it’s based on the reality that young people have sex when they are ready to have sex despite a law that criminalises them for having sex.

[JFKvsNixon]

A lower age isn't arbitrary; it’s based on the reality that young people have sex when they are ready to have sex despite a law that criminalises them for having sex.

 

Isn't it about being a matter of priorities though, with the age of the consent the priority must be protecting the vulnerable rather than allowing freedom of actions for young adults?

 

Interestingly in hospital care and treatment there isn't an age of consent as the law that covers comes under the Gillick competence case. The problem here is that it is unworkable for such a system to be applied to such a private and spontaneous acts so there has to be a cut off point to protect the vulnerable.

[Suffragette1]

Isn't it about being a matter of priorities though, with the age of the consent the priority must be protecting the vulnerable rather than allowing freedom of actions for young adults?

 

Interestingly in hospital care and treatment there isn't an age of consent as the law that covers comes under the Gillick competence case. The problem here is that it is unworkable for such a system to be applied to such a private and spontaneous acts so there has to be a cut off point to protect the vulnerable.

Indeed so, it's about harm reduction and protecting the vulnerable from exploitation, all covered in the Sexual Offences Act 2003.

[skinz]

< snip >.

 

 

 

 

"When girls hit whatever the age of consent is, there’s a certain patriarchal assumption that they’re now “fair game” (TV Tropes calls this the “Jail Bait Wait“; click at your peril): here, there is very real protection for young women, as it seems the only thing protecting them from the creeps banging down their door is the fact the creeps don’t want to be labelled paedophiles. Youth and innocence are fetishised under patriarchy, and therefore the legal boundaries currently do serve as a form of protection, albeit fairly inadequate. Shifting the age of consent down would serve to open up more young women to these predatory creeps who subscribe to patriarchal beliefs".

[MrSmith]

Isn't it about being a matter of priorities though, with the age of the consent the priority must be protecting the vulnerable rather than allowing freedom of actions for young adults?

 

Interestingly in hospital care and treatment there isn't an age of consent as the law that covers comes under the Gillick competence case. The problem here is that it is unworkable for such a system to be applied to such a private and spontaneous acts so there has to be a cut off point to protect the vulnerable.

 

I would agree if it protected vulnerable young people, but it doesn't, and there are better ways protecting them without criminalising them. it appears to be a subject that is unfortunately not open to discussion without the usual insinuation that anyone that wants it changing, must be a pervert, a paedophile, or a dirty old man.

[JFKvsNixon]

I would agree if it protected vulnerable young people, but it doesn't, and there are better ways protecting them without criminalising them.

 

You are focusing on the wrong part of the debate, you need to remember that the laws exist in an attempt to protect the vulnerable children from predatory adults.

 

 

......it appears to be a subject that is unfortunately not open to discussion without the usual insinuation that anyone that wants it changing, must be a pervert, a paedophile, or a dirty old man.

 

Why are you aiming this comment at me?

[janie48]

I would agree if it protected vulnerable young people, but it doesn't, and there are better ways protecting them without criminalising them. it appears to be a subject that is unfortunately not open to discussion without the usual insinuation that anyone that wants it changing, must be a pervert, a paedophile, or a dirty old man.

If you are bothered about how you may be perceived, to avoid being labelled it might be a good idea not to post intimate details on other threads about your personal conversation with a so called "nice young lady"

 

 

I agree with what others have said regarding the age of consent, it should remain at 16 as it has done for well over a century, for the most obvious reasons.

[skinz]

Good bye.

 

 

.........................

[Suffragette1]

It doesn't need changing because the Sexual Offences Act 2003 already addresses the issue of mutually agreed teenage sex. It just needs more robust application if it's being disregarded by overzealous idiot police and CPS as in the case Mr Smith keeps highlighting to use as the basis for lowering the age of consent and reminding us of the tragedy, Romeo and Juliet. Furthermore, as someone else stated, there may be more to that case than meets the eye.

 

I suspect that most people on here were under the age of 16 when they had their first sexual experience. How many were prosecuted? How many underage pregnant teenage girls and fathers are prosecuted? It's a nonsense argument.

 

---------- Post added 14-05-2013 at 10:58 ----------

 

Here is a powerful piece:

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/14/i-suffered-sexual-abuse?CMP=twt_gu

 

We don't say: look, I'm fine, despite you. We don't say: look, I'm no victim. We don't say: anyone touches my children and I'll kill them (not in public anyway). We don't want the pain of talking about it. And more importantly, we don't want to be judged for that significant act. The people who have come forward now, in their thousands, perhaps feel the same as me: why be defined by the Saviles, the Halls, the endless weird, isolated men who have been arrested recently?

 

The first to come forward and be identified in the media, have given others the confidence to do so, and this is a good thing. But it is noticeable that only a very few are giving their names to the media.