Right... we live in a world which is becoming more and more open and available. With boundary's falling, far away countries just a plane ticket away and different cultures there to be explored, now more than ever there is the opportunity to see that... people are people all over the world. We are the same. Creed, colour etc is no longer something which we are ignorant or scared of, it's something which is ours through our history, and we can compare it to those who have differing ones. We are proud of our countries but also proud of us as a species. Where we see poverty and hurt, we are moved, where we see triumph, we celebrate with those who have triumphed, because as a collective species it is our right as humans to share in this.
However, there is one issue which has bothered me for years. The age of consent for sex. The span of this, is frankly quite ridiculous as can be seen on the link above. Lets throw some examples...
Tunisia.. 20
Uk... 16
Spain... 13
USA Tennessee.... 18
USA South Carolina... 14/16
South Korea.... 13
Iceland.... 14
Ireland.... 17
Thats just a few. There's a 7 year swing there, and a possible 4 year swing between two places in the same country!! How can this be possible?
We, are all human beings. When born we have the potential to be what we want to be, speak any language we choose etc etc and yet, one of the most basic functions of human life, the ability to have sex and reproduce is denied to many and yet allowed to others. How can this be?
A note... I'm not looking for people here to say... arrggg 13 is too young... arrg 20 is too old... the age is not the issue! What is, is the fact that surely, to deprive a human the RIGHT to have sex in one country, when they've been legally having sex in another for X amount of years, is ridiculous.
What i also find bizarre is, having been asked to moderate/admin chat sites before, there are restrictions placed on what the chat content can be about. The majority of chat sites say you cannot talk about sexual issues or cyber etc until over 18. So... in the list of ages of consent, there are roughly 40 areas out of over 300 which say you have to wait til your 18 to have sex, but, for the other 260+ places where sex is legal before 18, in some cases 6 years younger than 18, your still not allowed to talk about it! How can that make sense?
If there is to be an age, then it should be standardised. Again, I will not get drawn into a discussion as to what age I think that should be, but I say again, to deny one human the right to have sex, and allow another, just because of his/her geographical location is a breech of human and civil rights, and something needs to be done about it!
esther
13 Comments
So, correct me if I'm wrong, this is just what I'm getting from the topic, if it's legal to have sex with a 7 year old in one country then that should make it all right. And if you deprive that person of that right then you are encrouching on their civil and human rights.
So what about the civil and human rights of the 7 year old?
Just because it's legal in a country does not mean it's right, and that 7 year old is no where near capable of making a logical decision about whether sex is appropriate for them or not. Nor are most 15 to 16 year olds capable.
The fact of the matter is, no matter what country you go to, you have to comply with their rules and laws. If a country says it's illegal to engage in sex with a minor, then don't do it. If you find you can't refrain from it, then you're accountable for breaking those laws.
But all in all, to have sex with a child, no matter where you are is just disgusting, and that's very much a personal opion.
As you quoted above... "The age is not the issue". The issue is the imposition of an age which is not uniform throughout the human race, when we are all humans.
No-one is talking about going to a different country and not obeying their laws. The question being raised is simple. Why, if we are all humans, is the age (if there needs to be one) not the same across the globe.
Your whole response is orientated around age... and I say again, age is not the issue.
How can it be deemed ok in one country, but not in another for someone to have sex just because of their differing laws regarding age. Sex is a natural human act. The geographical location of having sex should not govern a persons right to be able to engage in it!
Its not a cultural issue, nor an issue of law. Its a human issue!
If it's the law of that country or even state, then that's what you have to abide by.
Please, state more Ali, because I'm honestly not seeing where you're coming from.
why would it be legal to have sex in iceland when you are 14 and wait till you are 20 in tunisia?
something is basically wrong with that....I cant suppress the idea that apparently...sexwise...you are best off as a teenager in spain....you can have sex at 13 while your internetmates in ireland have to wait 4 more years to have sex legally....
seems that governments all over the world cant decide when a teenager is ready for sex...and they all apply their own rules....
wondering how long it takes for teenagers in ireland to appeal to the European court for Human Rights to be granted the same priviliges as their spanish counterparts...
lol
Same principle- whatever historical background determined that law- made it so- as for sex- some cultures believe that marriage should happen very young- as they might not have long lifespans- due to environmental reasons or because they need to start early in order to have large families - might have been the basis for some low numbers-
And thats the point. I dont not see how it can be right to say its ok to have sex if you are French at 15, but not if you are English. If that isn't a form of discrimination then I don't know what is!
Drinking, and alcohol is a different issue. There are all sorts of other laws involving them. It is a commodity. Something you purchase. Not something you naturally do. The laws differ in the various countries because of that, where as sex is different. I do actually find it baffling that here in holland kids of 16 are allowed to buy beer in a pub, but in the uk/usa they are not, but i put that down to the individual countries governments lack of liberalness.
To be honest, I don't see how any government should have the right to tell us when we can or can't have sex, but to have such a vast difference between one place and another is ludicrous!
We live in a world that daemonises sex as often as it can, its dirty, its rude etc etc. By us even having a "sex is now allowed" age only adds to that. And by having such a diverse set of ages governing it, makes a mockery of the whole idea anyway of an age when we are deemed capable, and culpable, of dealing with the responsibilities which comes with it. If there is to be an age set, then irrespective of that age, it should be universal, regardless of where you live.
Ali, be that as it may, it's not how the world works. It's different where you go. You either abide by the law or you don't. If you are caught then you pay the consequences, and most places are not sympathetic to ignorance of the law.
It's pretty black and white to me.
Are you planning on starting some world campaign for universal sex? *L*
"You either abide by the law or you don't. If you are caught then you pay the consequences, and most places are not sympathetic to ignorance of the law."? What relevance has this to the point being made? No ones talking about breaking laws. No ones talking about getting caught.
The only thing here which i see as black and white is that a persons human rights should be the same across the globe. A system of government is not designed to alter peoples human rights, nor should it be able to dictate them.
You don't think its stupid that someone who lives 10 miles away from another person, born on the same day, should be denied / allowed the right to have sex when their neighbour can? You don't think that that has to be wrong? No recognition of a flaw there? This is simple human rights, not local law.
Show me some legislation which, using argued examples, shows why, and the best example has to be state against state Americans, why a Tennessee male, is deemed unable to have sex until 18, yet a Vermont male is fine at 16? How is that not fundamentally floored? If you think that this is an OK state of being am I to assume that you think it is OK to therefore think of a Tennessee male in some way lesser able than a Vermont male?
All animals are equal yet some are more equal than others? Or maybe, i should've ended that with an exclamation mark.. it seems not only is the question not being addressed, but the statement with an exclamation mark is all to readily accepted.
As historically, girls were wed as soon as they had 'flowered', it may be argued that, naturally, this should be the age at which they become 'able' to have sexual relationships. This would negate any need for legislation to do with age and therefore any percieved 'unfairness' in that respect.
Of course many people will say 'but I know someone who 'flowered' at 11 and that's far too young'. I'd actually have to agree, but you can't have it both ways (er.... if you see what I mean). If a person's body tells them they're old enough then they'll do it if they want anyway, regardless of any law.
who sets it up and who polices it? Who polices the nations that allow that law to go unheeded?
"You either abide by the law or you don't. If you are caught then you pay the consequences, and most places are not sympathetic to ignorance of the law."? What relevance has this to the point being made? No ones talking about breaking laws. No ones talking about getting caught.
Obviously the law has a lot to do with it otherwise people would never get arrested for having sex with a minor, and since the state or country where you reside in sets the mandates for what age a person is still considered a minor, I would say the law is pretty relevent to the issue.
And most rational humans do not want their 16 year old engaging in it with the potential of pregnancy and STD's that so many younger people are being exsposed to now.
Does it stop them? Obviously not in a lot of cases, sadly.
Now exactly how are you planning on changing all of it? What would your plan of action be and would you really set out to do it?
Just one more point on what you've written though. Doesn't the line "And most rational humans do not want their 16 year old engaging in it with the potential of pregnancy and STD's that so many younger people are being exsposed to now." sound just a touch umm... suspicious? especially the word "rational".
That one word manages to alienate just a few hundred countries and their people who, going by your own argument, have accepted that its ok for people of a younger age to engage in the act of sex. Just because the idea doesn't fit with what you've been brought up with, doesn't make it irrational. It makes it different.
I see this as misguided, others would take huge offence and the word racist would be bandied around.
In truth all of these countries have a law, which they allegedly claim to enforce. To have the age as a constant wouldn't be anything other than an alteration of what they have existing. The UK has just altered the age people can buy cigarettes at. It was implemented simply enough, and that requires lots of administration. A declaration of a change of age would require pretty much nothing other than an alteration of legislation, as there is no consumer issue to address.
Hey you know AdGuy always gets the last word! ;)