Damn those sexy kids

[InfidelRiot]

This image got me to thinking. However, I believe for the statement to be true in most cases, except for those of the Catholic Church, the word "kids" is a poor substitute for teenagers. Sexually active teenagers, after all, due to the hormones racing through their bloodstream, do intentionally seek sex. Not always in those older than them, but sometimes.

I will make it clear that an adult having sex with a child is wrong. No doubt about it. However, I do believe that an adult having sex with a teenager who is sixteen or seventeen is not wrong. I am, after all, upping the age several years from what was perfectly acceptable in our not too far past. It is true that teenagers were more mature back in the day, and in all honesty one could still make the argument that puberty is a good and valid distinction of maturity, yet it majorly agreed upon that most of today's teenagers are not very mature.

There is always the exception to every rule, which is why I believe that some and possibly most sixteen and seventeen year old individuals are perfectly capable of deciding for themselves whether they want to consent to sex with an adult. It is especially true in cases of boys, because there is the double standard where it seems to be permissible and encouraged by the male gender for an underage boy to have sex with an older woman while an underage girl seems absolutely incapable of making up her own mind to enjoy sex.

Please, share your opinions and thoughts. Also, if a mod finds a more suitable place for this, please move it.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I think there's a major difference between teenagers having consensual sex with each other, or even a completely free relationship between an older teenager and an adult, and sex between an adult in a position of authority and a teenager under him.

Frankly, much like prohibitions on professors dating their students or doctors dating their patients, I would argue that it's inappopriate for a priest to have sex with one of their parishoners, regardless of the age of the parishoner.

 

[InfidelRiot]

I agree with that logical assessment, Penguin. However, I was not merely referring to an adult in a position of power over one who should be considered a charge.

I believe there is nothing wrong with a sixteen year old woman who consents to sex with an adult male.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I am of a rare minority that favors abolishing the age requirements for sex. While there is a clear distinction between taking advantage of a child, and someone who is only 12 or 13 having their own curiosities, if someone has sexual urges I don't see a reason to deny them. That is also assuming the individual, regardless of age, is informed, is consenting, is taking precautions, and all that other good stuff. But then again, I'm not so naive as to pretend that it is impossible for someone as young as 12 to have sexual urges. While I wouldn't encourage my own kids (if I had any) to have sex at that age, by that age they would know about puberty, what is going on and what will happen to their bodies, sex and sexuality, birth control and protection, and that it is their own choice to have sex and they don't need people in their lives who judge them by their sexuality and if they have had sex or not.

 

[InfidelRiot]

Thank you, and I agree SW.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I think there's a major difference between teenagers having consensual sex with each other, or even a completely free relationship between an older teenager and an adult, and sex between an adult in a position of authority and a teenager under him.

Here in Indiana, a teacher was fired for having sex with one of her high school students, and she was arrested, convicted, served time, and is a sex-offender regardless of the fact the two have an actual relationship with each other, and would even get married and start a family with together.

 

[InfidelRiot]

Here in Indiana, a teacher was fired for having sex with one of her high school students, and she was arrested, convicted, served time, and is a sex-offender regardless of the fact the two have an actual relationship with each other, and would even get married and start a family with together.

I am not sure if it is the same case, but I remember a story about a teenage boy who had consensual sex with a female teacher and she went to prison. When she got out, many years later, the boy who was older still wanted to be with her and they were finally able to according to the law.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

It seems like a lot of people changed their minds on this since the thread I created way back when about Hentai Pedophilia

 

[Skwim]

While exceptions to rules are all around us, when establishing limits, either maximums or minimums, it's always safest to error on the side of caution. Therefore, whereas there are numerous 16 and 17 year-olds who are quite mature, those who are not need laws that protect them until they are more mature. And because lawmakers aren't about to go into assessing each individual to determine one's maturity, an age is selected so as to encompass the vast majority. The vast majority of 18 year-olds being fairly mature enough to make reasonable and informed decisions.

So, like it or not, those under 18 years of age, no matter how mature they may be, still remain off limits when it comes to having sex with someone over 18. Fair? Maybe not, but that's life. Thems the rules.

 

[InfidelRiot]

I understand your point of view, skwim, but erring on the side of caution cannot be the sole reason for disallowing mature sixteen year old individuals to consent sexually to adults. In fact, there are plenty of individuals eighteen or nineteen or even twenty who are not even as mature as those younger than them.

 

[Skwim]

I understand your point of view, skwim, but erring on the side of caution cannot be the sole reason for disallowing mature sixteen year old individuals to consent sexually to adults. In fact, there are plenty of individuals eighteen or nineteen or even twenty who are not even as mature as those younger than them.

I tend to agree that there are a lot of immature eighteen, nineteen, and twenty year-olds, and even those above twenty-one; however, eighteen has been the selected minimum age. Yet I am curious as to what you think the other reason(s) may be for disallowing mature sixteen year old individuals to consent sexually to adults.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

The legal niceties of the exact age of sexual partners are very much a modern phenomenon.
And reflects on the behaviour of those in authority and with power over the young over very many years.

There is a massive difference between a sexual predator of young persons. And sexual attraction between people of any age group.

Samuel Pepys was very partial to young preteens, and at 3 pence a time, showed not the slightest guilt.

Today we see every one as having equal human rights, and make laws to reflect societies morals.
The law is quite unable to distinguish between peoples ability to be "choosing" and selecting partners out side the usual age ranges, and those that simply are predators.

These things go in cycles, and I suspect in time we may find a way to be more rational. In the mean time "Age" and authority would seem to be the only way to apply legal sanctions.