MrSmith Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 Homo sapiens first evolved about 500,000 years ago. Your ancestral line clearly missed out on the sapiens bit of evolution. I can't be held responsible for the way I evolved, it may surprise you but humans didn’t evolve identical to each other, we are all different, these differences make each one of us unique. ---------- Post added 09-05-2013 at 18:23 ---------- Mostly contempt, tempered with a bit of exasperation. You shouldn't let other peoples uniqueness annoy you, you should celebrate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 I knew what I wanted at 13 and for millions of years humans coped quite nicely without an age of consent. And the award for the biggest simplification of human history goes to ... Mr Smith, for his potted history of sexual consent. What do I win, I didn't want to make it too complicated because I new you would be reading it. Open season on children...happy now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 I agree that there is a clear difference here. In my view it would be inappropriate to criminalise the issue in the first case and essential in the second. However, there are clearly much better ways to deal with this than by lowering the age of consent to thirteen. Having then age of consent at 16 doesn’t stop people doing what is a perfectly natural thing to do, it also doesn’t stop them being raped, it serves no purpose at all. Children being children will likely have sex just because adults tell them they shouldn’t have sex, they drink alcohol because we tell them they shouldn't, they smoke because we tell them they shouldn't. We should guide them through life not force them through life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 Having then age of consent at 16 doesn’t stop people doing what is a perfectly natural thing to do, it also doesn’t stop them being raped, it serves no purpose at all. Children being children will likely have sex just because adults tell them they shouldn’t have sex, they drink alcohol because we tell them they shouldn't, they smoke because we tell them they shouldn't. We should guide them through life not force them through life. What it does do, quite rightly is criminalise sex between adults and children under 16 years old. Why would you want to change that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 What it does do, quite rightly is criminalise sex between adults and children under 16 years old. Why would you want to change that? Why wouldn't you want to give 13, 14, and 15 year olds the free will to choose to do something that comes naturally? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 Why wouldn't you want to give 13, 14, and 15 year olds the free will to choose to do something that comes naturally? Because the need to protect them from sexual abuse by adults is more important. Besides, children of those ages can and often do engage in varying degrees of sexual behaviour anyway. ---------- Post added 09-05-2013 at 18:39 ---------- Why wouldn't you want to give 13, 14, and 15 year olds the free will to choose to do something that comes naturally? I've just realised that you completely ignored my question - I asked you why you would want to reduce that age of consent. Of what benefit would it be and to whom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 Because the need to protect them from sexual abuse by adults is more important. Besides, children of those ages can and often do engage in varying degrees of sexual behaviour anyway. But it doesn't protect them from sexual abuse as demonstrated by all the news we are hearing about lately. ---------- Post added 09-05-2013 at 18:41 ---------- Because the need to protect them from sexual abuse by adults is more important. Besides, children of those ages can and often do engage in varying degrees of sexual behaviour anyway. ---------- Post added 09-05-2013 at 18:39 ---------- I've just realised that you completely ignored my question - I asked you why you would want to reduce that age of consent. Of what benefit would it be and to whom? It would give young people a choice to do something that is natural and normal without being criminalised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 But it doesn't protect them from sexual abuse as demonstrated by all the news we are hearing about lately. It means that abusers of under 16 can be prosecuted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted May 9, 2013 Author Share Posted May 9, 2013 What if they fall in love at 13. ---------- Post added 09-05-2013 at 18:16 ---------- Rape 1 13 year old girl willingly has sex with 16 year old, she is happy she had sex, she doesn't feel used in any way, when she is old enough they get married. She was technically raped because legally she can’t give consent. Not serious. Rape 2 13 year old girl dragged into bushes by 13 year old boy, she is beaten and raped, and left traumatised. Very serious. Indeed. However, she isn't on about hormone filled teenagers doing what consensual hormone filled do and have done since the year dot, she wants to give a free pass for middle aged men to abuse (not rape thank god) girls (and boys no doubt). You mentioned somewhere that you wouldn't let your teenage girl go into a room with a stranger - some kids don't have the benifits of your parentage. This would give men old enough to know better carte Blanche to put their grubby hands over anyone over 13. It's wrong. The only upside is that on the whole it's being accepted by everyone as wrong. I hope Brewster or whoever she is gets a p45 in the morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 but humans didn’t evolve identical to each other, we are all different, these differences make each one of us unique. Oh dear. Genetic variation now means that the age of consent should be 13. A side spin and two thirds. You're a genius at going off on a tangent. I'll give you that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.