Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 14 Nov '17 19:51 / 1 edit
    Maybe some of you should start bashing France for awhile. https://www.yahoo.com/news/child-sex-isnt-rape-french-set-age-consent-105241781.html
  2. 14 Nov '17 20:03
    The article is grossly misleading. The age of consent is 15 in France.
  3. 14 Nov '17 20:21
    In Victorian Britain, the age of consent was 12 years until it was raised to 13 years in 1875.
    In 1885, it was raised again to 16 years. In 1917, it was *almost* raised to 17 years.

    http://www.historyandpolicy.org/policy-papers/papers/the-legacy-of-1885-girls-and-the-age-of-sexual-consent

    "The legacy of 1885: girls and the age of sexual consent"
    --Victoria Bates

    "In July 2014 the Guardian cited a Home Office report that recommended lowering the
    age of consent in line with lower ages of puberty. The report suggested that ‘sexual
    behaviour with a girl over the age of 13 (the average age of puberty) is not criminal,
    provided that she was clearly as aware of what she was doing and its implication as
    might be expected of a girl of 16’. Although this report - Sexual Offences, Consent and
    Sentencing – was written in 1979, and is bound up with number of concerns about the
    influence of Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) at this time, the idea that a lower
    age of puberty should lead to changes in sexual consent law still lingers."

    "Protecting girls or controlling them?
    The meaning of sexual consent changed in line with social shifts. Victorian legal changes
    reflected a number of contemporary – sometimes contradictory – concerns with: child
    welfare, working-class disorder and sexual immorality. The age of consent was changed
    for the first time in the nineteenth century in 1875, when the felony clause was raised
    from 10 to 12 and the misdemeanour clause from 12 to 13. It was in 1885, however,
    that the most significant change took place in the wake of a newspaper exposé of the
    so-called ‘White Slave Trade’ in young girls. A public interest in child protection drove
    the passage of the 1885 Criminal Law Amendment Act, but its finer details were concerned
    as much with control as protection. The law, which set the felony age at 13 and misdemeanour
    age at 16, reflected a particular late-Victorian conflict between the promotion of child
    protection and a perceived need to regulate juvenile sexualities.

    In 1885 the focus of lawmakers was firmly on the question of female capacity, in two
    forms: the capacity to consent and the capacity to control emergent sexualities."
  4. Standard member wolfgang59
    Infidel
    14 Nov '17 20:41
    There is a good case for making the age of consent something
    like 14. Which is a de facto consent age in many countries with
    GPs dishing out contraception to young girls. But why shouldn't
    teenagers' have control of their bodies?

    Of course the danger is older men and women preying on youngsters
    so any law change would have to have caveats - for instance on age
    differences.
  5. Standard member vivify
    rain
    14 Nov '17 22:18 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by @kquinn909
    Maybe some of you should start bashing France for awhile. https://www.yahoo.com/news/child-sex-isnt-rape-french-set-age-consent-105241781.html
    "Is a 13-year-old old enough to agree to sex with an adult? That's a question France is asking as the government prepares to set a legal age for sexual consent for the first time."

    I don't think that's the main issue. The problem isn't whether a 13 yr old is old enough to understand sex or the consequences and responsibilities that come with it.

    The main problem is that children can be manipulated by adults in unscrupulous ways. Whether or not a 13 yr old can consent is eclipsed by how adults can use their position in society to coerce a minor. And I don't just mean when it comes to consent; the same can apply to stifling accusations of rape from children.

    So even someone in their early teens is mature and intelligent enough to consent to sex, there is an inherent imbalance in the power dynamic between a child and adult; and that's even before we get to the physical differences.
  6. 14 Nov '17 23:38 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by @wolfgang59
    There is a good case for making the age of consent something
    like 14. Which is a de facto consent age in many countries with
    GPs dishing out contraception to young girls. But why shouldn't
    teenagers' have control of their bodies?

    Of course the danger is older men and women preying on youngsters
    so any law change would have to have caveats - for instance on age
    differences.
    In the UK we have something called Gillick Competency and Fraser Guidelines. It is used to help clinicians, safeguarding professionals and social workers decide whether or not a child/adolescent has or had the level of maturity and competence to be able to give informed consent to engage in a certain activity with or without the knowledge of the parent who has the legal responsibility for them. This could include having sexual intercourse, an operation or form of treatment or receiving prescribed medication. In addition there’s the SERAF assessment which identifies a young person’s vulnerabilities to the risk of sexual exploitation. Any person who discovers that a person under the age of 16 has been having sexual intercourse needs to ask themselves whether they think there are any presenting risks for that person? If there is the slightest uncertainty it can be checked out with a phone call to any health professional, social worker or safeguarding teacher. This can usually be done without giving the person’s name.

    https://www.nspcc.org.uk/preventing-abuse/child-protection-system/legal-definition-child-rights-law/gillick-competency-fraser-guidelines/
  7. 15 Nov '17 02:18
    Originally posted by @vivify to Kquinn909
    "Is a 13-year-old old enough to agree to sex with an adult? That's a question France is asking as the government prepares to set a legal age for sexual consent for the first time."

    I don't think that's the main issue. The problem isn't whether a 13 yr old is old enough to understand sex or the consequences and responsibilities that come with ...[text shortened]... er dynamic between a child and adult; and that's even before we get to the physical differences.
    "There is an inherent imbalance in the power dynamic between a child and adult;
    and that's even before we get to the physical differences."
    --Vivify

    But many men here seem unable to grasp or unwilling to accept that the differences in power
    between a male employer and his female employee can make her supposed sexual 'consent' problematic.
  8. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    15 Nov '17 19:16
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    "There is an inherent imbalance in the power dynamic between a child and adult;
    and that's even before we get to the physical differences."
    --Vivify

    But many men here seem unable to grasp or unwilling to accept that the differences in power
    between a male employer and his female employee can make her supposed sexual 'consent' problematic.
    In that case, doesn't she do the calculus 'how badly do I want this job'? Which is not to say I am in any way condoning the actions of the boss, but a certain percentage of women in that position would do that calculus. 10%?
  9. Standard member shavixmir
    Guppy poo
    15 Nov '17 20:49
    Well, since I’ve got a daughter I can only say that the age of consent must surely be 30 or something.
  10. Standard member vivify
    rain
    15 Nov '17 21:14
    Originally posted by @shavixmir
    Well, since I’ve got a daughter I can only say that the age of consent must surely be 30 or something.
    What would that age be if you had a son?
  11. 15 Nov '17 21:46
    Originally posted by @wolfgang59
    There is a good case for making the age of consent something
    like 14. Which is a de facto consent age in many countries with
    GPs dishing out contraception to young girls. But why shouldn't
    teenagers' have control of their bodies?

    Of course the danger is older men and women preying on youngsters
    so any law change would have to have caveats - for instance on age
    differences.
    So you are a defender of Moore?
  12. Standard member wolfgang59
    Infidel
    15 Nov '17 23:51
    Originally posted by @whodey
    So you are a defender of Moore?
    I haven't read that story.
  13. 16 Nov '17 00:07
    Originally posted by @wolfgang59
    I haven't read that story.
    He is accused of dating teenagers while he was in his 30's.

    Is that OK with you?
  14. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    16 Nov '17 02:16
    Originally posted by @whodey
    He is accused of dating teenagers while he was in his 30's.

    Is that OK with you?
    Actually he's accused of sexually assaulting teenagers, one who was 14 years old.

    Is that OK with you?
  15. Subscriber vandervelde
    medieval punk rocker
    16 Nov '17 02:41
    There is an Serbian folk song, collected by Dr Vuk Karadžić, famous linguist and renewer; in this song folk wisdom showed itself as age of consent (for girls) was determined by pubical hairiness. No pubical hair - no consent. Yes pubical haris - grab the pussycat before Trump. But they did it with "please". They asked first.