TS: I know plenty of legal age women who are not mentally mature enough. Age has nothing to do with it. But when you talk about being mentally mature enough, what specifically are you talking about, and why do you think it has anything to do with having sex?
Sean, I think, yet again, you have hit upon the pervasive hypocrisy that exists in this puritanical country. It wasn't all that long ago in parts of this country where 13 was considered marriagable age. For some people in Texas, it seems they still do.
So what changed? World War 1 came along, then WWII, and suddenly there's this puritanical resurgence in this country. Can anyone explain why for hundreds (if not thousands) of years we considered girls in puberty marriageable and then suddenly we changed our minds and decided that was just evil?
I think nature chooses for us when we are ready to have sex, not society. That is one of the purposes of puberty. If you're old enough to be interested, then you're old enough to be doing, and there shouldn't be any negative consequences for anyone. I mean heterosexuals and homosexuals and everythign in between.
The problem with these young people having sex is with the adults that surround them. THEY have the problem, and they transmit that problem to the young person, and suddenly their needs and desires are bad. They're too immature to act on them.
Why don't we say that they're too immature to feed themselves when they have that need too?
It's like those teachers in Florida, female teachers who got caught having sex with teenage boys. Everyone talked about the damage done them, how they'll need therapy and all this shit. Let me tell you something... As someone who was once a teenage boy who spent many a masturbatory fantasy lusting after a teacher or two, had I had a hottie teacher come on to me and have sex with me when I was 14 or 15, I would not need therapy! I'd have a permanent grin on my face that would turn me into a man! Any damage that gets done is done by the parents and other adults that supposedly "care" for that child.
I think this country needs to grow the fuck up and stop projecting your own fears and insecurities about sex onto your children.
Curmudgeon:
That's exactly my point. The problem is with the adults that surround them.
>>The hypocrisy that I see is turning children into sex objects, not in denying them the "right" to be sexual.<<
I agree. And I did not intend to suggest that anyone being forced to do anything aginst their will was somehow of value, because I strongly reject that notion.
But when we're talking about "Having Sex with Minors" my assumption is consensual sex.
I disagree with the notion that a 13-17 year old person isn't emotinally capable of appreciating the consequences of leading a lifestyle that includes sexual activity. While they clearly are not as sophisticated about adult relationships as any of the 40-year-olds on here, I don't think they are so incompetent about it that they should be denied the right to a sexual life, irrespective of whether that is with other teenagers or with people over the age of 18.
That was my point, and I want to make sure that's clear.
I don't disagree with you on the issue of consent, at all.
Hotaka, you make a very good point about the sexualization of children via beauty pageants.
That is a profound contradiction to the notion that young people should not be sexual.
As I read back, I realize that what I'm saying may not be clear yet.
I'm speaking from the aspect that the law presupposes that a person under the age of 18 "doesn't have the capability to consent because they cannot appreciate the consequences of that consent."
I'm suggesting that the only reason they are not able to appreciate those consequences is because they've never been allowed to be involved with them (openly), except accidentally, and then it's too late.
See, I don't think kids that age are emotionally ready to deal with the horrors of high school, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't go. But just because they are not necessarily emotionally ready doesn't mean they shouldn't experience it. No one (on their first marriage) is ready for the intensity that is divorce, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't experience it, learn from it, and improve their life as a result. Does that make sense to you?
After all, it is with what challenges us that we learn lasting lessons. If they're never given the opportunity to learn any adult lessons at the age when they are most susceptible to that learning, then how can we complain that they make mistakes about those issues?
I say give them more credit than your parents gave you, it can only yield healthier, wiser people. :-)
Speaking of the Devil...
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080501011134AAef2Ms&r=w
The world agrees. Mr. Policeman is KA-nockin at the door. Grab my *Vasoline please!(*trade mark)
Call me *Mr. Pedo.
In the U.K as a Sixteen year old you can legally do the following;
Leave home and live independently with permission from parents but very often its not enforced.
Claim social security benefits (if you are eligible for them)
Work full-time if you have officially left school (you will also pay tax on your earnings)
Be paid the Minimum Wage
Get married with your parents or carers consent
Join the Armed Forces with parents permission
Legally have sex (Both boys and girls must be over 16 before they can legally have sex. A male may consent to a homosexual act if he and his partner are aged 16 or above)
Ride a moped of up to 50ccs
Have an abortion without parental consent
Apply for your own passport
Pilot a glider
Smoke but not buy tobacco products.
However, they are not considered mature enough to
wait for it........
VOTE?
You may find the following link of interest, they deal with the whole "age of consent" etc
http://www.avert.org/aofconsent.htm
SG