The Supreme Court in Ireland on Thursday ruled that a boy under the age of 17 having sex with a girl under the age of consent is still a criminal offence. The logic appears to be that because the girl runs the risk of pregnancy, she needs support structures, etc. Its all very much a very tangled mess and violates the constitution directly in terms of equality. Would it be better to allow consensual sex between two people of 15-17 (for example) age bracket where there is a gap of no more than a year or two? What if they're 12 and 14? What if the girl is older and more mature than the boy? More info including the actual legislation can be found here.
http://www.thejournal.ie/underage-sex-r ... 1-Feb2012/
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2006/en/ ... index.html
The Romeo and Juliet case. Gender discrimination or not?
The Romeo and Juliet case. Gender discrimination or not?
The Vinyamars on Stage! This time at Bag End
-
Impenitent
- Throw me a rope.
- Posts: 7260
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 12:13 am
- Location: Deep in Oz
I don't know about it being gender discrimination, but I have some ambivalence towards laws that deal with the age of sexual consent.
I feel that some protection is necessary, because many young people don't have (I acknowledge that some do have) the emotional maturity to deal with the repercussions of having sex. However, I feel uncomfortable about criminalising sexual exploration and experimentation between two young people who are peers.
I didn't read the link, and I don't have time to do so now, nor to elaborate on my response (probably a good thing, as I haven't read the link), but my daughter, heading toward 19, has been sexually active for about 6 months now, and we, as her parents, are assimilating that knowledge right now, so the discussion is timely for me.
I feel that some protection is necessary, because many young people don't have (I acknowledge that some do have) the emotional maturity to deal with the repercussions of having sex. However, I feel uncomfortable about criminalising sexual exploration and experimentation between two young people who are peers.
I didn't read the link, and I don't have time to do so now, nor to elaborate on my response (probably a good thing, as I haven't read the link), but my daughter, heading toward 19, has been sexually active for about 6 months now, and we, as her parents, are assimilating that knowledge right now, so the discussion is timely for me.
Mornings wouldn't suck so badly if they came later in the day.
Kids have sex with each other all the bloody time. "Allow it"? Who's going to "allow it"?
I think girls get talked into/coerced into sex a lot, but I also think that many girls have sex because they want to have sex.
I think girls get talked into/coerced into sex a lot, but I also think that many girls have sex because they want to have sex.
Bingo.We are aware that there is teenage consensual sexual activity. That should not be criminalised. What needs to be done is awareness-building around the risks.
Dig deeper.
-
Primula Baggins
- Living in hope
- Posts: 40005
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:43 am
- Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
- Contact:
In the United States, I believe some states don't criminalize sex if both partners are under 18 and there's an age difference of less than two or three years (varies by state). This has always seemed sensible to me. Very young kids having sex may be in need of support and advice, but they don't need to be dragged into court.
“There, peeping among the cloud-wrack above a dark tor high up in the mountains, Sam saw a white star twinkle for a while. The beauty of it smote his heart, as he looked up out of the forsaken land, and hope returned to him. For like a shaft, clear and cold, the thought pierced him that in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
-
nerdanel
- This is Rome
- Posts: 5963
- Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:48 pm
- Location: Concrete Jungle by the Lagoon
Statutory rape laws that treat girls of a certain age differently from boys of the same age re: their ability to consent to sexual acts are wrong. They infantilize the former group and threaten to victimize the latter group by criminally stigmatizing consensual acts. Protecting minor girls who are of a reasonable age of consent (e.g. 14-17) who choose to engage in sexual intercourse should take at least two forms:
1. Ensuring that they are educated, ideally both by their parents and schools, on the risks and benefits of sexual intimacy, with emphasis on the former. They should be schooled on STD risks, pregnancy risks (if they are in heterosexual relationships), and the emotional risks involved. They should be reminded of their absolute right to say no at any point in time - and of the importance of making sure that they have a sexual partner whom they trust to say no at any point in time. Note that sex education should not be heterosexist and should presume that some members of the class will have M/M or F/F sex, however they identify their sexual orientation.
2. Girls engaging in heterosexual sex should be advised of the downsides of teenage pregnancy and should be taught that they have every legal and moral right to protect themselves against unwanted pregnancy, including contraception, emergency contraception, and abortion. Both boys and girls should be taught about the importance of using condoms both re: STDs (regardless of orientation - or this would be dental dams for lesbian couples) and re: pregnancy for straight couples.
To be blunt, I really think that 18 as the societal norm for the minimum age at which sex might start to be a good idea ... is itself a good idea. I don't think teenagers should be having sex. I actually feel uncomfortable having typed the above because I don't think that teenagers should have to deal with adult realities like STD testing and unwanted pregnancy, and I think that there are just too many unhappy outcomes for teenagers who become sexually active. But I recognize that rational social policies cannot be in denial about the reality that many teenagers are sexually active. We have to be pragmatic about the fact that teenagers may make the (usually poor) choice to become sexually active, and we have to take steps to minimize the harm that might result. I don't see a way to do that - with respect to consensual sex between teenagers who are very close in age - using the criminal law.
1. Ensuring that they are educated, ideally both by their parents and schools, on the risks and benefits of sexual intimacy, with emphasis on the former. They should be schooled on STD risks, pregnancy risks (if they are in heterosexual relationships), and the emotional risks involved. They should be reminded of their absolute right to say no at any point in time - and of the importance of making sure that they have a sexual partner whom they trust to say no at any point in time. Note that sex education should not be heterosexist and should presume that some members of the class will have M/M or F/F sex, however they identify their sexual orientation.
2. Girls engaging in heterosexual sex should be advised of the downsides of teenage pregnancy and should be taught that they have every legal and moral right to protect themselves against unwanted pregnancy, including contraception, emergency contraception, and abortion. Both boys and girls should be taught about the importance of using condoms both re: STDs (regardless of orientation - or this would be dental dams for lesbian couples) and re: pregnancy for straight couples.
To be blunt, I really think that 18 as the societal norm for the minimum age at which sex might start to be a good idea ... is itself a good idea. I don't think teenagers should be having sex. I actually feel uncomfortable having typed the above because I don't think that teenagers should have to deal with adult realities like STD testing and unwanted pregnancy, and I think that there are just too many unhappy outcomes for teenagers who become sexually active. But I recognize that rational social policies cannot be in denial about the reality that many teenagers are sexually active. We have to be pragmatic about the fact that teenagers may make the (usually poor) choice to become sexually active, and we have to take steps to minimize the harm that might result. I don't see a way to do that - with respect to consensual sex between teenagers who are very close in age - using the criminal law.
I won't just survive
Oh, you will see me thrive
Can't write my story
I'm beyond the archetype
I won't just conform
No matter how you shake my core
'Cause my roots, they run deep, oh
When, when the fire's at my feet again
And the vultures all start circling
They're whispering, "You're out of time,"
But still I rise
This is no mistake, no accident
When you think the final nail is in, think again
Don't be surprised, I will still rise
Oh, you will see me thrive
Can't write my story
I'm beyond the archetype
I won't just conform
No matter how you shake my core
'Cause my roots, they run deep, oh
When, when the fire's at my feet again
And the vultures all start circling
They're whispering, "You're out of time,"
But still I rise
This is no mistake, no accident
When you think the final nail is in, think again
Don't be surprised, I will still rise
Teenagers have always been sexually active, ever since there have been teenagers. The teen years are the years that Nature intends people to be sexually active.
Yes, all that education and knowledge is useful and "should" be available for everyone. Every teenager "should" understand it all.
But, this is the real world. Most kids are woefully ignorant of all that nerdanel wisely says they should know. They are ignorant because no one teaches them: neither their parents nor their schools. Many, if not most, parents are embarassed or think they "might give them ideas" or are ignorant themselves. Many parents object strenuously to the idea of a school teaching anything useful about sexual activity.
There is a lot of information on the internet, but, sadly, a lot of it is in the form of pornography.
IMHO, a parent cannot pretend or wish or hope their kids are not sexually active. Kids are almost always light years ahead of where their parents think they are.
Be as upfront as you can be. Be as blunt as you can be. Do not pry, do not spy.
A little embarassment is good for everyone.
Yes, all that education and knowledge is useful and "should" be available for everyone. Every teenager "should" understand it all.
But, this is the real world. Most kids are woefully ignorant of all that nerdanel wisely says they should know. They are ignorant because no one teaches them: neither their parents nor their schools. Many, if not most, parents are embarassed or think they "might give them ideas" or are ignorant themselves. Many parents object strenuously to the idea of a school teaching anything useful about sexual activity.
There is a lot of information on the internet, but, sadly, a lot of it is in the form of pornography.
IMHO, a parent cannot pretend or wish or hope their kids are not sexually active. Kids are almost always light years ahead of where their parents think they are.
Be as upfront as you can be. Be as blunt as you can be. Do not pry, do not spy.
A little embarassment is good for everyone.
Dig deeper.