Belldandy
[color=teal][b]Ice-Type Fanatic[/b][/color]
- 3,979
- Posts
- 11
- Years
- Age 31
- Ottawa, Ontario
- Seen Oct 29, 2018
What's silly is you can be with someone one day, but if your 18th birthday is the next day (and the other person's 16, going on 17), then today you're legal; tomorrow, you're a felon.
So what's the lesson? Only date people born on the same day as you in the same year (in order to avoid being charged and labeled a sex offender)? Pretty limiting / unrealistic. Obviously American laws need to incorporate a leniency somewhere. If you can have sex at 16 and choose your partner (16 being the "age of consent" in most places; in others, it may even be younger / older i.e. 17), then why can't you choose an 18-year-old as your significant other? If you're "mature" enough (as by the "age of consent") to have sex to begin with, I don't see how kissing or being with someone after their 18th birthday is an issue. I can see 16 and 25 being awkward, but if you're 16 and the other person is 17, and at the time you can legally engage in sexual conduct, I don't see why OMG THAT PERSON IS SUDDENLY A DAY OLDER AND IS 18 NOW somehow makes grounds to label someone a sex offender.
The real issue here isn't the victimization / participants, although I do agree that the parents are bigots and probably wouldn't have done it had her partner been male.
The real issue is the fact that the law isn't thorough or defined well enough to avoid trapping kids like this on their 18th birthday. There needs to be a reform; otherwise, the age of consent should change to eighteen and the whole "at 15/16/17 you're old enough to make relationship decisions" should be abolished. You can't go halfway supporting teenagers' sexual choices only to allow the parents to intervene after the age of [sexual] consent, leading to situations like this where a woman's future is in jeopardy because of what her partner's parents think of it.
Either after the age of consent, the individual has complete control of their relationships and sexuality, or there is no age of consent at all and recognition of independant thought starts at eighteen. Not in favour of the latter.
Of course, still within limits to avoid sex tourism. A sixteen-year-old with a twenty-year-old isn't "off" to me. I think the four year leniency works well as to avoid exploitation of teens.
That means (where Age of Consent is 15):
14 = Anything can be considered sexual exploitation
15-19 = OK
16-20 = OK
17-21 = OK
18 = Do what you want
Going on year of birth (YOB). If a 16-year-old born in September is with a 20-year-old who was born in April, then obviously the person will turn 21 before the 16-year-old turns 17 (going by the above chart, twenty (20) is the "limit" of the leniency.) This should still be considered OK because it is a difference in months rather than years, based on YOB.
So what's the lesson? Only date people born on the same day as you in the same year (in order to avoid being charged and labeled a sex offender)? Pretty limiting / unrealistic. Obviously American laws need to incorporate a leniency somewhere. If you can have sex at 16 and choose your partner (16 being the "age of consent" in most places; in others, it may even be younger / older i.e. 17), then why can't you choose an 18-year-old as your significant other? If you're "mature" enough (as by the "age of consent") to have sex to begin with, I don't see how kissing or being with someone after their 18th birthday is an issue. I can see 16 and 25 being awkward, but if you're 16 and the other person is 17, and at the time you can legally engage in sexual conduct, I don't see why OMG THAT PERSON IS SUDDENLY A DAY OLDER AND IS 18 NOW somehow makes grounds to label someone a sex offender.
The real issue here isn't the victimization / participants, although I do agree that the parents are bigots and probably wouldn't have done it had her partner been male.
The real issue is the fact that the law isn't thorough or defined well enough to avoid trapping kids like this on their 18th birthday. There needs to be a reform; otherwise, the age of consent should change to eighteen and the whole "at 15/16/17 you're old enough to make relationship decisions" should be abolished. You can't go halfway supporting teenagers' sexual choices only to allow the parents to intervene after the age of [sexual] consent, leading to situations like this where a woman's future is in jeopardy because of what her partner's parents think of it.
Either after the age of consent, the individual has complete control of their relationships and sexuality, or there is no age of consent at all and recognition of independant thought starts at eighteen. Not in favour of the latter.
Of course, still within limits to avoid sex tourism. A sixteen-year-old with a twenty-year-old isn't "off" to me. I think the four year leniency works well as to avoid exploitation of teens.
That means (where Age of Consent is 15):
14 = Anything can be considered sexual exploitation
15-19 = OK
16-20 = OK
17-21 = OK
18 = Do what you want
Going on year of birth (YOB). If a 16-year-old born in September is with a 20-year-old who was born in April, then obviously the person will turn 21 before the 16-year-old turns 17 (going by the above chart, twenty (20) is the "limit" of the leniency.) This should still be considered OK because it is a difference in months rather than years, based on YOB.
Last edited: