PDA

View Full Version : How young is too young?


FreakyLocz14
July 1st, 2011, 10:32 AM
In most places, it is illegal to engage in sexual activity with a minor. In California, it is even illegal, though rarely prosecuted, for two teenage minors to engage in sexual activity with each other.

Does a couple where one partner is 18 and the other is 17 being intimate with each other really deserve harsh criminal punishment and the possibility for them to have to register as sex offenders for the of their lives? I think not.

My question for you is, where do we draw the line? Is a 16 year old being with a 21 year old too much of an age difference? Then how do you explain people like Anna Nicole Smith, who used to date old men while she was in her 20's and 30's?

Also, in some places, the age of consent is lower for heterosexual activity and higher for homosexual activity. Is that fair?

Discuss.

EDIT:
In Canada, the age of consent was 14 for a long time. It was recently increased to 16. In America, ages of consent vary from 15-18 depending on their state or territory. In some states (mostly Southern states) and territories the age of consent will be 15-17 for heterosexual activity, while it will be 18 for homosexual activity. This is likely because this is the only way that those states can criminalize homosexual behavior.

Cariad
July 1st, 2011, 10:35 AM
Wow...

Well, in my opinion, age doesn't matter when it comes to a relationship. You can be in love and have like...11 years difference. But a 20 and 80 year old doesn't work. I mean, there are limits, but not many. Wow i'm so bad at explaining myself. You get the point.

Alley Cat
July 1st, 2011, 10:43 AM
I think that all this age stuff is just plain bull-****.
I can understand them wanting to protect people who don't really want the sex, but feel they don't know how to say no. But, guess what? I don't choose to.

The whole age difference, legal and non-legal thing is also a bunch of crap. Who cares if your bf/gf is two years younger? What does it matter? It is hurting no one for someone who is 18, and someone who is 16 or 17 to be together. I mean, as long as both people are actually committed to it, then what's wrong? What's your reason for condemning it? I don't have a problem if the age difference is ten years, so long as they are both consenting adults. The thing, the bigger the age difference, the older you should be. Because an adult in the eyes of law(18) truly does have no business being with someone not even sexually developed(10). But if they want to do it, when the 10 year old is 20, and the 18 year is old 28, then fine. That's their business again, their both legal adults.

But what gets me, is when they try to prosecute two "underage" people who just want to do what they want to do, and want to have the fun they should be allowed to have. They aren't hurting anyone by having sex, so the government should just lay off.

&& The heterosexual age being younger than the homosexual one? That's just more of that homophobic behaviour that is so riddled throughout our government creeping up throughout the cracks. They figure they can't stop it, so they might as well as try to delay it, or find ways to get rid of them(making their acts illegal.). But again, that's just homophobic fear. What difference is the sex between me and my boyfriend, and my sister and hers? Not a damn thing. We both love and care about our partners, so what difference does it make? None. Just bigots being bigots.

Dixie Kong
July 1st, 2011, 10:52 AM
Does a couple where one partner is 18 and the other is 17 being intimate with each other really deserve harsh criminal punishment and the possibility for them to have to register as sex offenders for the of their lives? I think not.

That's like...if you were 20, almost 21, and went out and drank. You're still breaking the law, but at the same time, who really cares? I'm indifferent on this one. While I feel like "well you're almost 18 anyway, so why does it matter?" the same would apply to drinking alcohol before the age of 21. People do both of those, so idek.

My question for you is, where do we draw the line? Is a 16 year old being with a 21 year old too much of an age difference? Then how do you explain people like Anna Nicole Smith, who used to date old men while she was in her 20's and 30's?

There's a vast difference in maturity and milestones with a 16 year old and a 21 year old. For one, a 16 year old has, likely, just gotten their driver's license. They're still in high school, not even a senior. Probably around 9th-11th grade. A 21 year old though? They've had their license (usually), have graduated high school, possibly college (or are at least close to doing so), can legally drink alcohol, and just...there's just too many social differences between the two. I mean, they can be together, sure, but you're likely to not have too much in common. No limits to love, but I still...well, if I were 21, I wouldn't even be interested in a 16 year old. Heck, I'm 18 and don't even wanna think about being with a 16 year old. lol

Also, in some places, the age of consent is lower for heterosexual activity and higher for homosexual activity. Is that fair?

If anything, why isn't it lower? You can't get pregnant from homosexual activity! But no, if there's gonna be a limit on sexual activity for heterosexuals and homosexuals, give them the same limit. That's just ridiculous that it would be higher. Just...why. lol People still break it anyway though~!

Hi I'm Syd and I suck at explaining what I'm trying to say.

Black Ice
July 1st, 2011, 10:56 AM
The reason is probably because 16 year olds don't understand the risk of having a child at such a young age, and they're not responsible enough for one. The older person might just be taking advantage.

18 sounds like a more reasonable age than 16, but if the person does it anyway, he/she should be prepared for any unfortunate consequences. I don't think age differences should matter as long as it's consensual.

Kyoko
July 1st, 2011, 11:00 AM
Well, I for one am not a fan of overly young kids doing anything of the sort, even if they around the same age. My friend works as a camp counselor and she told me her 5th graders were talking about sexual and I was like NOOOO WHY.

But age difference? I totally agree with Sydian, I knew a 16 year-old who was dating a 22 year-old and that grossed me out. Because a 16 year-old and a 22 year-old are at very different stages in their lives and want different things and the maturity is generally off.

I'll put more into this post later when I get back since I have to go :x

Alley Cat
July 1st, 2011, 11:06 AM
I agree with Sydian on the whole 16, 21 wont have much in common. But think about it in different perspectives. They've known eachother their whole lives, or maybe they go to a few parties together, because even if they aren't supposed to be drinking/having the same interests, that still doesn't mean that they dont. The two might be at different points in their lives, but they could still have been drawn together due to something that they've shared in their life. It could be that one point in common. But I do see what you mean about the whole difference in social status there.

As long as everyone is safe about, and sexually developed or developing... then I don't see much of problem with anything.

seeker
July 1st, 2011, 11:07 AM
I think there ages that are certainly too young. But I think it depends on your maturity and where you are in a relationship. But in my opinion, any age under 16 or 17 is far too young, and even at that I think the teenager would need to be in a good place and in a decent relationship with the person they're doing it with. Otherwise they're going to see sex as sex, and I do not feel they will have much of any other view on it until they do it with someone that means something to them, which is a whole other thing entirely.

My question for you is, where do we draw the line? Is a 16 year old being with a 21 year old too much of an age difference?

I think so, but it depends on the relationship they've had really. But really, I think the 16 year old should be in a mutual situation as the other person, especially for their first time, the 16 year old does not need to remember their first time being a bad experience.

Then how do you explain people like Anna Nicole Smith, who used to date old men while she was in her 20's and 30's?
I wouldn't call her any sort of example, to be honest. And I don't consider her to be a good role model in this sense. But she had the right to marry or be with whoever she wishes, but research her situation and you'll find reasoning for dating older men.

Also, in some places, the age of consent is lower for heterosexual activity and higher for homosexual activity. Is that fair?
I'm not very opinionated on this, but I think that it's always going to be a different sort of experience, and the dangers are different in each. With that said, I don't really see why there is a difference in the jurisdiction for either situation, and I don't feel that it should be.

Livewire
July 1st, 2011, 11:13 AM
Well, I for one am not a fan of overly young kids doing anything of the sort, even if they around the same age. My friend works as a camp counselor and she told me her 5th graders were talking about sexual and I was like NOOOO WHY.

But age difference? I totally agree with Sydian, I knew a 16 year-old who was dating a 22 year-old and that grossed me out. Because a 16 year-old and a 22 year-old are at very different stages in their lives and want different things and the maturity is generally off.

I'll put more into this post later when I get back since I have to go :x

Agreed with Kyoko & Sydian. No 16 year old is in the same ballpark in terms of maturity, schooling, occupation, etc, as a 21 or 22 year old. Take a freshamn in High School, and switch their lives with a Freshman in College, and it'd be very noticeable. Sure, a 16 year old might seem mature to a passerby, but notice how the "You seem mature for your age" add-on gets mentioned when people compliment kids like that. You seem mature at 16. What have you done to warrant that? You just got out of junior high. Ok, yes, you can drive at 16. How about pay insurance? Or for a home? Feed/Clothe yourself? Pay for college? Be conscripted into the military? Raise a family at an early age? Go to Jail? The world is big and scary in some cases, it's not easy. Look at the show 16 & Pregnant on MTV. One big train wreck after the other, because they are too young to handle real world problems. 18 should be the uniform age for everything in the eyes of the government.

FreakyLocz14
July 1st, 2011, 11:21 AM
Agreed with Kyoko & Sydian. No 16 year old is in the same ballpark in terms of maturity, schooling, occupation, etc, as a 21 or 22 year old. Take a freshamn in High School, and switch their lives with a Freshman in College, and it'd be very noticeable. Sure, a 16 year old might seem mature to a passerby, but notice how the "You seem mature for your age" add-on gets mentioned when people compliment kids like that. You seem mature at 16. What have you done to warrant that? You just got out of junior high. Ok, yes, you can drive at 16. How about pay insurance? Or for a home? Feed/Clothe yourself? Pay for college? Be conscripted into the military? Raise a family at an early age? Go to Jail? The world is big and scary in some cases, it's not easy. Look at the show 16 & Pregnant on MTV. One big train wreck after the other, because they are too young to handle real world problems. 18 should be the uniform age for everything in the eyes of the government.

Should the 18 year old line be that definite? What about my example of a 17 year old and an 18 year old in a relationship? A 1 year or less age difference certainly isn't anything major.

Alley Cat
July 1st, 2011, 11:25 AM
Agreed with Kyoko & Sydian. No 16 year old is in the same ballpark in terms of maturity, schooling, occupation, etc, as a 21 or 22 year old. Sure, a 16 year old might seem mature to a passerby, but notice how the "You seem mature for your age" add-on gets mentioned when people compliment kids like that. Look at the show 16 & Pregnant on MTV. One big train wreck after the other. 18 should be the uniform age for everything in the eyes of the government.
I agree with the government needing a uniform age, and 18 should be it. But with shows lie 16 & Pregnat, they make the scenarios out to be worse than they actually are. It's all about drama, money, ratings, and views to them. I should know, I've known a few different "16 & Pregnant" people, and none of it was even REMOTELY close to how they protray it on the show. They like to throw a few wrenches into the system and see what happens because of it.

But who needs to be at the same maturity level to be together? My sister's boyfriend is just a plain immature dumbass. He's 18, and less mature than me. But that doesn't make him any less of person. My sister is less mature than me. But sometimes I'm less mature. It goes around in a circle like that, honestly.

If they are physically mature, then in most cases, they are mentally mature enough. If they can both stand up there and say: This is whole-heartedly what I wanted, I was fully commited, and I have no regrets blahblah then what does it matter? Again, it doesn't harm you, let them do as they please. A 16 year old has just as much chance getting pregnant as does a 21 year old(disregarding fertility rates/ovulating etc) & Depending on their situation, a 16 year old could take better, just as good, or worse care of a child than a 21 year old can. It is situation dependent, but of course that would be applying double standards, and the government cant and shouldn't do that.

They just need a central, uniform age of consent/maturity/allowedtodowhatyouwant. 18 sounds just, you've gone through all your mandatory schooling(in most cases).

All I know though.. is I've kissed people 18(just turned), and people 13. I was consenting to both of those. I ASKED for those kisses, and I kissed back. Is the 18 year old supposed to get arrested because he kissed me? Nah. That just ain't cool.

Should the 18 year old line be that definite? What about my example of a 17 year old and an 18 year old in a relationship? A 1 year or less age difference certainly isn't anything major.

There are always going to be things that are unjust because of the law. But that is where double-standards kick in. The government can't(READ: shouldn't) apply the law to some situations and other ones. While it might not seem fair for the 17 and 18 year old couple to be illegal, they can't let that slide, yet still press the 16 and 18 year old couple. That'd be double standards, and they can't technically do it. They have to apply a definite line, and they have to stick to it, it's the only way to be fair.

Livewire
July 1st, 2011, 11:27 AM
Should the 18 year old line be that definite? What about my example of a 17 year old and an 18 year old in a relationship? A 1 year or less age difference certainly isn't anything major.

A year or so would be permissible, I think. When I started dating my girlfriend in High School three years ago this October, she was 16 (A month away from 17) and I was 18. But I think I'd be hard to justify 22 and 16, 21 and 16, etc.

Guy
July 1st, 2011, 11:34 AM
That's like...if you were 20, almost 21, and went out and drank. You're still breaking the law, but at the same time, who really cares? I'm indifferent on this one. While I feel like "well you're almost 18 anyway, so why does it matter?" the same would apply to drinking alcohol before the age of 21. People do both of those, so idek.

There's a vast difference in maturity and milestones with a 16 year old and a 21 year old. For one, a 16 year old has, likely, just gotten their driver's license. They're still in high school, not even a senior. Probably around 9th-11th grade. A 21 year old though? They've had their license (usually), have graduated high school, possibly college (or are at least close to doing so), can legally drink alcohol, and just...there's just too many social differences between the two. I mean, they can be together, sure, but you're likely to not have too much in common. No limits to love, but I still...well, if I were 21, I wouldn't even be interested in a 16 year old. Heck, I'm 18 and don't even wanna think about being with a 16 year old. lol

If anything, why isn't it lower? You can't get pregnant from homosexual activity! But no, if there's gonna be a limit on sexual activity for heterosexuals and homosexuals, give them the same limit. That's just ridiculous that it would be higher. Just...why. lol People still break it anyway though~!

Hi I'm Syd and I suck at explaining what I'm trying to say.
Syd's explanation above would be my sentiments exactly.

Also, you explained it wonderfully.

Bluerang1
July 1st, 2011, 11:54 AM
I guess 18 or even 19. Stuffs like that shouldn't be happening when you're still in school. You have better things to worry about. Apart from age of consent, I believe in waiting until marriage. Why conjoin with someone you'll eventually forget? O_o

Livewire
July 1st, 2011, 11:57 AM
Why conjoin with someone you'll eventually forget? O_o

I take great offense to that. So, since I've had premarital sex, that dooms my relationship automatically, no matter how much I love my girlfriend? (In my case, at least) Let's be a bit more reasonable and open minded than that.

Alley Cat
July 1st, 2011, 12:07 PM
I guess 18 or even 19. Stuffs like that shouldn't be happening when you're still in school. You have better things to worry about. Apart from age of consent, I believe in waiting until marriage. Why conjoin with someone you'll eventually forget? O_o

I'm gay. I can't get married. Does this mean I'm supposed to live a sexless life forever? Or at least until they decide to legalize gay marriage? No. I don't plan on that. && Just because you haven't married someone, doesn't mean you will forget them. I haven't had sex, and when I do, it's probably going to be with my current boyfriend, but not for a while. We're going to wait until we're both ready and want it. Can we get married? No. So that's out of the option, and we aren't going to wait until the government decides that we are legal. && I'm certainly not going to ever forget him. It's been a year, and he's the first person I've been able to say "I love you" to. No, he's never going to leave my mind.

FreakyLocz14
July 1st, 2011, 12:28 PM
I take great offense to that. So, since I've had premarital sex, that dooms my relationship automatically, no matter how much I love my girlfriend? (In my case, at least) Let's be a bit more reasonable and open minded than that.

I don't find it offensive at all. People have different moral values. Waiting until marriage speaks volumes about someone's sense of morality, and is a sign of restraint. It doesn't make those who engage in premarital sex automatically immoral, though.

I'm gay. I can't get married. Does this mean I'm supposed to live a sexless life forever? Or at least until they decide to legalize gay marriage? No. I don't plan on that. && Just because you haven't married someone, doesn't mean you will forget them. I haven't had sex, and when I do, it's probably going to be with my current boyfriend, but not for a while. We're going to wait until we're both ready and want it. Can we get married? No. So that's out of the option, and we aren't going to wait until the government decides that we are legal. && I'm certainly not going to ever forget him. It's been a year, and he's the first person I've been able to say "I love you" to. No, he's never going to leave my mind.

Well, you could see if there are civil unions or domestic partnerships where you guys live.

Livewire
July 1st, 2011, 12:31 PM
I don't find it offensive at all. People have different moral values. Waiting until marriage speaks volumes about someone's sense of morality, and is a sign of restraint. It doesn't make those who engage in premarital sex automatically immoral, though.


In your particular view of things, maybe. I fail to see how it shows an upstanding moral sense or restraint, however maybe in your culture it does. But that was an offensive and close minded statement he made.

Gold warehouse
July 1st, 2011, 02:14 PM
I generally tend to categorize teens into two areas, younger than 16 and older than 16 (since the laws here say 16 is the age of consent). I think, if two people below 16 do things together, it's really not that bad; and most do anyway IT'S CALLED EXPERIMENTING. Whereas if it's a 13 year old and a 17 year old, it seems a lot more like the oldest is taking advantage here.

If a 16 year old and a 20 year old had sex, I wouldn't have a problem. It's the same age difference, but the mental gap between being 14 and then just two years later being 16 is pretty large. There's a lot of development that goes in a very short amount of time when you're at that age.

So generally I think once you're over the age of consent you can do what you want. If one person is above and the other is below then it's likely there's something wrong (but not always); but if both people are under the age of consent it's not as bad as one being above and one being below. Like most situations though, you really cannot apply a universal category, because there will always be a minority that contradict it. But we have to, for the sake of the law. I would say that I support the idea of 16 being the age of sexual consent. And in this country, most cases of two minors having sex is brushed aside, which I support as well.

As for homosexuals having different laws, as usual, it's just ridiculous.

Shining Raichu
July 1st, 2011, 03:41 PM
I actually think the age of consent should be lowered for everybody. I'm not sure about the exact specifics of it all, but the second you hit puberty there are hormones and urges coursing through your body that need to be constantly maintained. Now, I'm not suggesting that 12-year-olds should be engaging in these activities, but I do think that sex has been made overly sacred by society and needs to be de-stigmatised. It's just a bodily desire that needs to be fulfilled, and I personally don't see why it takes this commonly-talked-about x amount of maturity to partake. As long as they practice safe-sex, of course. But how much maturity does it take to put on a condom?

My opinion is make the age of consent 15 years old everywhere. Teenagers are going to have sex, and telling them they're not allowed to have sex until the adults judge that they're ready is a little too totalitarian for my taste and will not work anyway.

As for age differences, a 16 year old with a 21 year old does not bother me in the slightest. If a 15 year old was with a 25 year old that would be a different story. I think everybody has their own lines to draw on that particular topic, but this imaginary apartheid line between those over 18 and those under 18 has taken too severe a meaning under the law.

And again, as for homosexuals having different standards to live by, ridiculous and unfair as always. But that will change as the bigots begin to die off and a new society emerges :)

I don't find it offensive at all. People have different moral values. Waiting until marriage speaks volumes about someone's sense of morality, and is a sign of restraint. It doesn't make those who engage in premarital sex automatically immoral, though.

People too often confuse values with morals in my opinion. To say something like that shows how morally upstanding someone is, that's a judgment call that nobody really has the authority to make. For instance, I don't believe that no sex before marriage is moral, I think it's more than a little silly and goes against baser instincts just for the sake of going against baser instincts.

Freedom Fighter N
July 1st, 2011, 04:03 PM
Raichu, it's not a matter of age.
When was the last time you met a 13 years old and you got a good explanation of how the process goes, and the risks involved, what do to in certain situations, etc? Most likely it didn't happen. Now, ask the same question a 16 years old.

And no idea why it became so holy either. Gotta say, it's an hour at best with foreplay, so what the hell. Sex is likely 3% at best of the time you spend with your lover anyway. Even 3% is bad? Wut.
Oh well, this is coming from a 17 years old male's mouth, so it probably can't be taken seriously.

And I kinda categorize teens like Vendek here does, except it's a "mentally mature" and a "mentally immature" instead of younger or older than 16.

FreakyLocz14
July 1st, 2011, 04:55 PM
In your particular view of things, maybe. I fail to see how it shows an upstanding moral sense or restraint, however maybe in your culture it does. But that was an offensive and close minded statement he made.

I think you took what he said the wrong way. He wasn't saying that you're immoral if you have sex with your girlfriend before marrying her.

Esper
July 1st, 2011, 05:39 PM
Depends on maturity. There's no easy answer. Buuuuut... half your age plus seven rule? Let's start there.

A 20 year old can only be with someone 17 or older.
A 19 year old can only be with someone 16.5 or older.
An 18 year old can only be with someone 16 or older.
A 17 year old can only be with someone 15.5 or older.
A 16 year old can only be with someone 15 or older.
A 15 year old can only be with someone 14.5 or older.
A 14 year old can only be with someone 14 or older.

Anyone younger doesn't fit into the formula. Therefore anyone under 14 is too young, flat out. I think that's a pretty good starting point. Too young is also not knowing how to use a condom and not knowing about STIs. I don't know when people learn about that in school, but for me it was in 9th grade when most kids were 14 or 15. So I'd say that 14 is a good bottom limit, but even then it should follow the half-your-age-plus-seven rule. And even then I think most aren't ready, but I wouldn't automatically say someone is too young at 15, just that they probably aren't.

PkMnTrainer Yellow
July 1st, 2011, 05:48 PM
Age matters a whole lot when someone's below say 20. However, it starts mattering less and less the older both people get. When you're a teenager though, it matters a whole lot, and for a dang good reason. It's there to protect the naive.

Also, inb4 trying to justify not trying to stop the naive from suffering because of their naivety.

Evanlyn
July 1st, 2011, 06:30 PM
ok, if some of you take this as an insult, I am sorry, but I feel that I have the need to explain (as best as I can) about sex, all I ask is you read the whole post;

1. When a couple has sex, it forms a bond - it makes the couple emotionally attracted to each other, so when they break up, it will make it SO much harder - love cannot be based on feelings alone, but also on decisions.
2. having sex before you're married doesn't help your relationship - although many people might think "ooh cool, a bond, that will help our relationship!" all it will do is basically destroy your relationship. It will blot out reason. Fights will start. There will be too much pressure put on both partners in the relationship.
3. If at least one of the people in the couple has had premartial sex before, then it is more likely of them getting STDs (Sexually Transmitted Diseases) - most of these are life changing and even deadly (yes, they can kill you) - I would suggest going to a doctor and getting checked, and then cease having premartial sex.
4. The most obvious one, pregnancy. After having sex, it is likely that the female will get pregnant, and if you break up, she will be a single parent (because if you have abortion, it is MURDER - most think that 'it's all right, it's not a human yet - WRONG, as soon as it is concieved, it is alive, it is human) Children need 2 parents, it is in their nature. The mother, especially if she is a teenager, will find it extremely difficult to care for her child, especially if she doesn't live at home anymore.
I saw that somebody mentioned 'condoms' in a previous post, saying it's fine and that they will 'protect' the people having sex. Once again, this is wrong. Condoms offer minimal, I repeat, minimal protection - even if you wear them, there is still a very high chance that you will get pregnant, it is best to refrain from premartial sex entirely.
5. another thing you should know is that the most couples who have had the happiest sex, was those who saved it for marriage.
6. Also, you should know that you should NOT marry just for sex - it will not be a good relationship, you will probably end up fighting so much, and then getting a divorce, don't do this.
7. If you are in a relationship, and your partner tells you 'if you love me, have sex with me,' then he/she doesn't truly love you, they are using you - talk to them, and, if he/she continues to use you, get out of there as fast as you can! If you never wish to get married, do not go into a relationship just for sex, that will mean that you are being a jerk and being selfish.
8. If you are wondering 'when can I marry her?' wait until she is older than 21. From the ages 16 - 21, she is going through many changes, it is likely that she will 'outgrow' you, just wait a while, and then, if she is still around, then you might seriously think about marriage.

If you have any more questions, feel free to ask me.

Evanlyn
July 1st, 2011, 07:25 PM
yes, sorry, I accidentally got 2 bits of info mixed up in my head - I will tell you what I was supposed to say;

A study has shown that condoms have a 31% 100% kill rate. It may seem fine, but you are putting yourself and your partner at incredible risk. A study has shown that condoms have a 31% failure rate. Now ask yourself, would you hop on a plane that you are told 'don't worry, 69% of our planes land safely, only 31% blow up in midair.' That's not a risk that I'm willing to take.

Esper
July 1st, 2011, 07:48 PM
I would like to see that study since it conflicts with what I know about condoms. Perhaps you were seeing a statistic about their effectiveness when not used properly, since improper use does reduce their efficiency, (and here is where you could make the connection of someone being too young to have learned how to do it properly) but don't go away thinking that condoms break all the time because, well, they don't, and if used in conjunction with other forms of contraception they can be super-effective at stopping pregnancy, even if it can't be a 100% guarantee.

Bluerang1
July 1st, 2011, 08:43 PM
In your particular view of things, maybe. I fail to see how it shows an upstanding moral sense or restraint, however maybe in your culture it does. But that was an offensive and close minded statement he made.

I believe. Me. Maybe some others but my post refereed to me :)

I'm gay. I can't get married. Does this mean I'm supposed to live a sexless life forever? Or at least until they decide to legalize gay marriage? No. I don't plan on that. && Just because you haven't married someone, doesn't mean you will forget them. I haven't had sex, and when I do, it's probably going to be with my current boyfriend, but not for a while. We're going to wait until we're both ready and want it. Can we get married? No. So that's out of the option, and we aren't going to wait until the government decides that we are legal. && I'm certainly not going to ever forget him. It's been a year, and he's the first person I've been able to say "I love you" to. No, he's never going to leave my mind.

Well then if you find someone you really love etc. You can't forget one you've loved can you?

Nafe
July 1st, 2011, 11:10 PM
Less than 2% of condoms break when used correctly. 1-5% may slip off and 3-13% may slip down but not off. That sure has hell is alot less than 31%..... And if you buy a condom that fits properly, you'll reduce the risk of slippage.
The breakage rate (which is what I would consider a failure, as the others don't relate to a fault in the product) is pretty damn low ;)
As I said, I have been using condoms for years and years and have never had one break or fall off, and I am not a daddy yet.

Alley Cat
July 2nd, 2011, 07:56 AM
Well, you could see if there are civil unions or domestic partnerships where you guys live.

As far as I'm concerned, everyone says wait until your married, not in a civil union or domestic partnership. This is gonna be off-topic, but also.. I don't want to get down on one knee, open a box with a few forms in it and say: "Will you be in a domestic partnership with me? Just sign here." That doesn't exactly float my boat.

&& Condoms have a very little chance of leading to pregnancy. If that's your qualm, there are are also other ways. Spermicide, Birth Control, Day After Pills, etcetc. So you can't chalk up underage sex to being a bad thing just because the condom might fail. Because the condom has the same chance to fail in and out of marriage. Plus... you could always, like I said, use the other methods such as birth control and spermicide.



Well then if you find someone you really love etc. You can't forget one you've loved can you?
No. I can't. Which is why what you said doesn't make sense. The whole, why do it with someone you are going to forget. && I'll ask you, since I can't legally get married, what would, by your morals and values, be the route for me to take?

Alley Cat
July 2nd, 2011, 01:17 PM
Don't get angry with Bluerang. All he did was say something he believed in(I personally agree with what he said, but that's just me). It shouldn't cause any offense if you firmly believe in what you do yourself. No reason to get fighty here....

Who here got angry? & So, by your beliefs, what would I have to do enable to justly have sex(as justly as possible with homosexuality being a sin) && If two people were 15 and got married, would that make their sex okay?

chanchimi
July 2nd, 2011, 04:31 PM
Who here got angry? & So, by your beliefs, what would I have to do enable to justly have sex(as justly as possible with homosexuality being a sin) && If two people were 15 and got married, would that make their sex okay?

You seem like you're getting angry by the way you're asking this question. I didn't say anything about ages and what makes it okay. You shouldn't really care what I think about that, anyways.

Alley Cat
July 2nd, 2011, 05:00 PM
You seem like you're getting angry by the way you're asking this question. I didn't say anything about ages and what makes it okay. You shouldn't really care what I think about that, anyways.

No. I'm just curious. Would sex be okay regardless of age by your beliefs if they were marrried? It's a debate, and I'm wondering.

chanchimi
July 2nd, 2011, 05:09 PM
No. I'm just curious. Would sex be okay regardless of age by your beliefs if they were marrried? It's a debate, and I'm wondering.

Ok. Well, I'm not really sure. Because for me personally, I don't think of it like that.... I would wait because I'm in no rush to be involved in it. I've never really been interested in anyone, or even been in a relationship. By choice, of course. xD Yea. Not sure if that makes sense.

But anyways. If you really want an answer, I guess I'd say that they can do what they want! Married or not, I wouldn't ever expect people to do things the way I would. I don't do almost anything people my age do. If that is what they want to do, gay, straight, married or not married. They can do what they want, when it comes to this, it is their choice. I can't change anyones opinions, and I wouldn't try to. (Sorry for this longish reply!)

Livewire
July 2nd, 2011, 06:55 PM
Let's get back on topic, please. In the future, Chanchimi & Alley Cat, If you want to debate like that, do so in VM's.

Alley Cat
July 2nd, 2011, 08:38 PM
Hm.. Sorry. It seemed on-topic to me, because we were still discussing age in and out of marriage. If anything got snappy back there, I didn't realize. So, again, sorry. :/

All I can say is, I'm 15. If I want to do something, I'm going to do it. I think if you are at an old enough age to ejaculate for men, or get your period for women, then you are physically ready for it. Mentally, however, depends on person to person. I might be a little too young, but there honestly wont be much difference for me between now and year. If you think that you're ready for it, and are planning to do it safe, then I can honestly say, go for it. This topic is so situation-based, that it'd honestly be impossible to pick a fair age. People would always feel(and some be) ready before that age, and some wouldn't feel(or be) ready until after that age. I guess that 18 is the most fair thing, because that is when you are ready to carry your own court issues and are basically sent off on your own.