[QUOTE=InvisibleTed;28599626]The thing is, the act of non-consensual sex is the sudden removal of the control of a situation from the victim, that in and of itself is traumatizing, physical violence need not be added to be harmful.[/QUOTE]
Exactly, when it's non consensual, it's rape, and that makes it harmful. So it's not the sex [i]in and of itself[/i] that is harmful - it's the [i]lack of consent[/i]. Anything is harmful and will be a negative experience if it is done towards you and without your consent.
And we all know the next argument; children cannot give consent.
But why is consent put on a pedestal when it comes to sex, and not on any other subjects? Why is consent so hard to give when sex is involved and nothing else? Is sex really so confusing to us that we have to put a warning sign, "Must be this tall to enter", because we're afraid of somehow "traumatizing" children with this relatively simple concept?
I think sex has been made out to be something it is not. It's like the most complex issue in our world, as if "to fuck or not to fuck" is the most deep and intricate question a philosopher could possibly ask.
It just seems really silly to me, because really, isn't sex a quite simple concept at least when you compare it to many other concepts like, off the top of my head: bullies, hate (and emotions in general), being different and death.
Sex is just physical intimacy, a much stronger bonding experience than a hug, and with added problems like STDs and pregnancy, but those are both easily explained and easily solved by anyone.
And just to make one thing clear, when I say that "children" can understand certain things, I suppose I'm talking about 10 year olds, plus minus.
And even then, I don't think you have to be able to fully understand it, I mean, you don't have to [i]understand[/i] hunger before you can eat and enjoy eating...
I don't think I'm conveying my points correctly, but oh well, I hope some of my points make sense, I must admit I feel my post is a bit cluttered, and so are my thoughts.
Also, mind pointing out which points in my posts are wrong? Even better if you could explain why :3
The age of consent in the United Kingdom is 16, which I think is not too low, but also not too high. Any lower than that would be wrong.
[QUOTE=Axiain;28597198]Even if the 15yo says its ok, its still Stachatory Rape. So the 26yo wont get let off the hook. At all.[/QUOTE]
Yes... I know. That's called AoC. That is what we are arguing. I was making an argument about if the AoC was lowered.
[QUOTE=Elgar;28600624]Any lower than that would be wrong.[/QUOTE]
No it wouldn't. The notion that sex is bad up until an arbitrary age for any reason other than physical trauma (e.g. a 12 year-old female having vaginal sex with a 40 year-old male), is a relic of Judeo-Christian bullshit thinking. There is no logical reason to think otherwise.
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;28596072][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_9CovvGm3Q[/media]
Consent is a very weird concept. I just find it strange that this concept exists for sex, something that is pretty much only good, [i](I mean, if you just pretend that you had never heard all the negative stuff before, how the hell would you come to the conclusion that sex could ever be harmful?)[/i] while it doesn't exist for so many other things.
I agree with the OP. In an ideal world, there wouldn't even be an age of consent. There would be no terms like "child sex predator", because nobody would be able to be a "sex predator". Of course you could still be a rapist, but then there would be other factors - it would not be [i]sex by itself[/i] that could ever be harmful, but rather all the other actual negative things happening that makes it a negative experience.[/QUOTE]
I'm sorry but Bill is a moron, you should've used someone else to back up your argument which is actually quite good.
[editline]14th March 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Sanius;28603415]No it wouldn't. The notion that sex is bad up until an arbitrary age for any reason other than physical trauma (e.g. a 12 year-old female having vaginal sex with a 40 year-old male), is a relic of Judeo-Christian bullshit thinking. There is no logical reason to think otherwise.[/QUOTE]
Is it just me, but if it anything anywhere comes from any religion, you want it dead? And that is your only motivation behind what you say? I'm not trying to derail, I agree with you to a point. I just find it funny that you seem to blame religion for a Whole lot of stuff.
[QUOTE=Swilly;28603619]I just find it funny that you seem to blame religion for a Whole lot of stuff.[/QUOTE]
Religion is to blame for a lot of stuff.
[QUOTE=Sanius;28603415]No it wouldn't. The notion that sex is bad up until an arbitrary age for any reason other than physical trauma (e.g. a 12 year-old female having vaginal sex with a 40 year-old male), is a relic of Judeo-Christian bullshit thinking. There is no logical reason to think otherwise.[/QUOTE]
I'm still gonna have to go with an AoC of 14 with a 4 year discrepancy.
Minimun AoC must be 16, even though, I would go with 18 years old.
The idea of AoC is kinda flawed, at MOST societies nowdays, with 16 years old you're choosing what you're gonna be for the rest of your life, with 17~~18 YOU CAN ALREADY SCREW YOUR WHOLE LIFE BY NOT STUDYING OR MAKING A BAD DECISION, if you can't fuck, why must YOU choose something that will echo for the rest of your life?
But there goes the issue with early pregnancy, do that, and in most cases, you just ruined your life.
Anyways, >AoC must be 18<, now quit it, you frikin' pedos.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;28607026]I'm still gonna have to go with an AoC of 14 with a 4 year discrepancy.[/QUOTE]
I'll think about it some more, you're making very good points. I try to make decisions based upon mostly logic anyway, so I'll think about that.
[editline]14th March 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=JohnnyOnFlame;28608282]Minimun AoC must be 16, even though, I would go with 18 years old.
The idea of AoC is kinda flawed, at MOST societies nowdays, with 16 years old you're choosing what you're gonna be for the rest of your life, with 17~~18 YOU CAN ALREADY SCREW YOUR WHOLE LIFE BY NOT STUDYING OR MAKING A BAD DECISION, if you can't fuck, why must YOU choose something that will echo for the rest of your life?
But there goes the issue with early pregnancy, do that, and in most cases, you just ruined your life.[B]
Anyways, >AoC must be 18<, now quit it, you frikin' pedos.[/B][/QUOTE]
And it comes right on back.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;28608550]
And it comes right on back.[/QUOTE]
Nobody who uses such childish insults should ever be taken seriously in a debate. I never pay attention to those sorts of posters.
holy fucking shit, way to jump to conclusions people, just because he has an opinion on why the AOC should be lowered, doesn't mean hes a god damn pedophile.
AOC is stupid anyway, it just helps 13 year olds pretend they are 18 and then sue older guys for supposedly "raping" them when it was simply a trick to get money. as said ages ago, Rape is rape, consensual sex is Consensual sex. if 2 13 year olds want to go at it, I see no problem with it.
I think in the end, it doesn't really matter what the age is. If a 14-year-old wants to have sex with a 19-year-old, they'll do it.
The only point of the AoC is so that if some kid's dad finds some older kid screwing his young son/daughter, he can charge for rape and get older person in some serious shit. IE, sex offender, fines, even and in most actual rape cases, jail time.
[QUOTE=thatjediknight;28609608]I think in the end, it doesn't really matter what the age is. If a 14-year-old wants to have sex with a 19-year-old, they'll do it.
[B]The only point of the AoC is so that if some kid's dad finds some older kid screwing his young son/daughter, he can charge for rape and get older person in some serious shit. IE, sex offender, fines, even and in most actual rape cases, jail time.[/B][/QUOTE]
Which is a problem and should be fixed.
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;28599481]There is no reason why you should be fucking any girls, unless you're trying to reproduce.[/QUOTE]
Uh, wrong.
[editline]14th March 2011[/editline]
What happened to my post count? I'll never become a gold member now!
[QUOTE=cqbcat;28564859]Do you really want a bunch of young women dating old ass sugar daddies?
I facepalm when I see women my age date older guys. It just seems wrong that they're not giving guys their own generation a chance.[/QUOTE]
Get back at them by dating their moms.
[QUOTE=x_xPwntx_x;28610876]Uh, wrong.[/QUOTE]
And why is it wrong?
[QUOTE=LuaChobo;28614086]r.
This does not work for butsecks
[/QUOTE]
I suppose you mean butt sex.
The legal term for butt rape is "buggered."
[QUOTE=LuaChobo;28614086]Late reply, i don't really know why, i'l try to find out.
EDIT: Well i found something interesting but not what i was looking for.
Apparently, if you can prove why you thought they were over 16 [No, saying "lol i thought she 16" does not count] you have a good defence.
This does not work for butsecks
EDIT: Welp, according to the internet what i learned in sex ed was not true, time to try and find the booklet.
If i do i'l take a picture to prove how retarded sex ed still is.[/QUOTE]
I distinctly remember a dude getting in trouble for having sex what he thought was an at least 18 year old who turned out to be 14. She was in an 18+ club and he got the short end of the stick.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;28598320]Why just males, if I may ask?[/QUOTE]
Because some people have this fucked up notion that sex is 'fine' at practically any age for a man (boy), but not for a woman (girl). On the most basic level, it's just playing further into the 'men are better than women' stereotype, whether it's acknowledged or not. Like a young man can handle the concept and action of sex with an older woman better than a young woman can with an older man.
The entire way in which the majority of people on this PLANET look at and 'classify' sexual interaction is just completely fucked up.
Damn it the debate is still going?
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;28613766]And why is it wrong?[/QUOTE]
People can have sex for fun, not just for procreation.
It's a behavior seen outside of humans, also.
[QUOTE=Tools;28531663]Scandinavian here, legal age here is 15 :smug:[/QUOTE]
Scandinavian here aswell and the legal age here is 16
your disgusting,
I would comment on this, but you know, some people would make the case that my [b]credibility is really low[/b] on this subject.
SEX SHOULD BE ONLY DONE IN THE MISSIONARY POSITION FOR PURPOSES OF PROCREATION
this is why i am against raising age of consent
let us take this apart
missionary position - if you are doing this to someone a lot younger than you they will be hurt
procreation - little kids shouldn't be having babies
I BELIEVE THAT ONLY MARRIED COUPLES SHOULD HAVE SEX
[QUOTE=deaththrea10;28617823]your disgusting,[/QUOTE]
Thanks for this insight.
[QUOTE=Treybuchet;28618358]SEX SHOULD BE ONLY DONE IN THE MISSIONARY POSITION FOR PURPOSES OF PROCREATION
this is why i am against raising age of consent
let us take this apart
missionary position - if you are doing this to someone a lot younger than you they will be hurt
procreation - little kids shouldn't be having babies
I BELIEVE THAT ONLY MARRIED COUPLES SHOULD HAVE SEX[/QUOTE]
Lighten up..
[QUOTE=Treybuchet;28618358]I BELIEVE THAT ONLY MARRIED COUPLES SHOULD HAVE SEX[/QUOTE]
Not sure if serious.
[QUOTE=x_xPwntx_x;28616768]People can have sex for fun, not just for procreation.
It's a behavior seen outside of humans, also.[/QUOTE]
I agree. That's why I was throwing the argument back at the guy originally making a similar argument.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.