Age of consent | INFJ Forum

Age of consent

Lerxst

Well-known member
Jul 3, 2010
2,380
750
0
MBTI
INFJ
This could be because I live in the middle of Polygamy Country out here in Utah, but the issue comes up time and time again. Putting aside every excuse, exactly at what point did it become taboo for teenagers to marry adults? I mean, people think "Sick! Gross! Pedophile! Cradle robber!" but the entire history of the American frontier is marked by teenage marriages - stories of 14 year olds marrying 40 year olds - and the Middle Ages in Europe saw the same thing. Adults would marry teenagers, have 8 kids and live together until one died. Death was more common than divorce, as opposed to present day.

Look at the stupid TV shows they have on these days where a 15 year old gets knocked-up by a 17 year old and they complain about their lives being ruined. Ever think if that 15 year old got knocked up by a 40 year old with a college education and a steady job well under his belt, all that teenage pregnancy drama would be a non-issue?

I'm just wondering at what point did society say that two people had to be identical in age (give or take 5 years) in order for a relationship to not be considered taboo when history shows us that wasn't always the case?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Norton
This could be because I live in the middle of Polygamy Country out here in Utah, but the issue comes up time and time again. Putting aside every excuse, exactly at what point did it become taboo for teenagers to marry adults? I mean, people think "Sick! Gross! Pedophile! Cradle robber!" but the entire history of the American frontier is marked by teenage marriages - stories of 14 year olds marrying 40 year olds - and the Middle Ages in Europe saw the same thing. Adults would marry teenagers, have 8 kids and live together until one died. Death was more common than divorce, as opposed to present day.

Look at the stupid TV shows they have on these days where a 15 year old gets knocked-up by a 17 year old and they complain about their lives being ruined. Ever think if that 15 year old got knocked up by a 40 year old with a college education and a steady job well under his belt, all that teenage pregnancy drama would be a non-issue?

I'm just wondering at what point did society say that two people had to be identical in age (give or take 5 years) in order for a relationship to not be considered taboo when history shows us that wasn't always the case?

Lol the age of consent here in Maui is 16. It used to be 14. Which is funny because somewhere out there there was a 13 year old with a 25 year old and the 25 year old was like "in a few months we can finally be together baby" and the 13 year old was like "googoogaga??".

But seriously, it has to do with allowing a persons brain to develop to a state where they are capable of making responsible and intelligent decisions. Plus who the hell wants to marry a little girl. Sorry but even some chicks that are 22-23 years old act too damn immature for me. I want a grown ass woman who carries herself with respect and has the ability to see through the average mans bullshit. Not a little girl who doesn't even have boobs yet and is too naive to understand what is happening to her. That's just creepy.

So sorry but it's very wrong for a 15 year old to be with a 40 year old man regardless of how good of a job he has. You have to remember women were very oppressed back in those days and were to a certain degree treated like property. Just because blacks were slaves back in the days does that mean they should be slaves now??? No of course not, using the fact that something used to be socially accepted to justify it now is an invalid argument.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rcs6r and barbad0s
I think it's actually a relatively recent thing.
Remember when Seinfeld was dating a 16 year old in the 90s? I don't think that it went over well, but he wasn't arrested or anything.

I think when it comes down to it people are individuals and that means it's difficult to place definite restrictions on the relationships that they choose for themselves. So the lawmakers try to protect as many people as they can at a time when they're seen as most vulnerable to exploitation. Unfortunately I think this also means that people are more emotional about things, people feel guilty for being attracted to certain people, and there are definitely times when the laws do harm.

I don't think this is something that many people are able to discuss objectively because nobody wants to appear to be defending pedophilia and a lot of people (mostly guys) do whatever they can to avoid making statements that could make them appear creepy or interested in younger people (mostly girls). People are super protective of their children and the word pedophile can turn otherwise normal people into bloodthirsty barbarians devising elaborate tortures for people they don't even know. The media definitely does a lot to drill this into people because they know if they can find stories where children are being exploited people will want to watch it. It's why Law and Order SVU was such a popular show... it taps into that protective instinct and helps to feed the hysteria.

I don't think it's necessarily a good thing and I don't have kids, but I don't see anything too wrong with a 17 year old dating a 40 year old... it makes more sense to me that she would be dating someone who could provide for her in the long term. But then, there are a lot fewer committed relationships out there as well nowadays, so there's always the possibility that she's just being used/fetishized because of her age... though at the same time, I think the idea of sexual 'purity' is pretty antiquated as well. It's a pretty complex topic that doesn't have any easy answers... again because it involves individuals that really can't be generalized into one specific set of traits or tendencies.
 
During time periods where the threat of starvation was a very real issue, economic stability was a gift far more valuable than the luxury of idealized relationships.
 
This could be because I live in the middle of Polygamy Country out here in Utah, but the issue comes up time and time again. Putting aside every excuse, exactly at what point did it become taboo for teenagers to marry adults? I mean, people think "Sick! Gross! Pedophile! Cradle robber!" but the entire history of the American frontier is marked by teenage marriages - stories of 14 year olds marrying 40 year olds - and the Middle Ages in Europe saw the same thing. Adults would marry teenagers, have 8 kids and live together until one died. Death was more common than divorce, as opposed to present day.

Look at the stupid TV shows they have on these days where a 15 year old gets knocked-up by a 17 year old and they complain about their lives being ruined. Ever think if that 15 year old got knocked up by a 40 year old with a college education and a steady job well under his belt, all that teenage pregnancy drama would be a non-issue?

I'm just wondering at what point did society say that two people had to be identical in age (give or take 5 years) in order for a relationship to not be considered taboo when history shows us that wasn't always the case?

I'll answer your last question first: you can marry someone who's ten years younger than you, but they have to be grown adults capable of fully independent thought.

To answer your first question: most people will tell you that wanting to fuck teen-aged girls is creepy and weird because one's mind is not fully developed until they reach their early- to mid-twenties. The reason why it's so recent is because society has not had such a great understanding of the human mind until the last hundred years or so, with the advent of the quantitative sciences of the mind and modern psychoanalytics.

As we know more about the mind, we can understand the development of the mind, and we can understand that, at an age when most people were entering the workforce or getting married in the 1600s, the average person is genuinely not prepared to take on those responsibilities. So, we adjust our lives and our laws and our systems to match the facts. That's progress.
 
  • Like
Reactions: the
In a society with more luxuries, children take longer to 'grow up'.

It's less about age as a number and more about being paired with a mature counterpart which can care for their self if need be.

Being paired with a child is an uneven relationship which makes the elder culpable and liable. It's one sided. What constitutes a child though depends on how fast we are forced to mature in our society.
 
I'll answer your last question first: you can marry someone who's ten years younger than you, but they have to be grown adults capable of fully independent thought.

To answer your first question: most people will tell you that wanting to fuck teen-aged girls is creepy and weird because one's mind is not fully developed until they reach their early- to mid-twenties. The reason why it's so recent is because society has not had such a great understanding of the human mind until the last hundred years or so, with the advent of the quantitative sciences of the mind and modern psychoanalytics.

As we know more about the mind, we can understand the development of the mind, and we can understand that, at an age when most people were entering the workforce or getting married in the 1600s, the average person is genuinely not prepared to take on those responsibilities. So, we adjust our lives and our laws and our systems to match the facts. That's progress.

Yes, also the meta structure of the society can accelerate faster than individual brains can evolve to keep up, since the requirements and responsibility of the society as a whole works independently and above the physical aspects of the mind.

So for example in the 1600's not only would it be discovered that some people are too young for certain things, it would also be discovered that many of these same things didn't even exist yet in BCE times.
 
I know a couple with almost 20 years difference. She was 17 when they were engaged - he was 36.

They seem happily married. It's a bit odd to me, but who am I to nay-say.
 
I know a couple with almost 20 years difference. She was 17 when they were engaged - he was 36.

They seem happily married. It's a bit odd to me, but who am I to nay-say.

It doesn't necessarily have to be all bad and in some places this would be legal I suppose.

In general though I think it's better to let the younger mature and experience life on their own in a way that is more productive to development. I believe it is useful to have a separation between mate and parent but this sort of thing can easily blur that separation.

In the most extreme case you could end up with a relationship that is not unlike the deep sea anglerfish, where the male is a tiny fish that can only live a short while on its own. It must seek out the female and bite her, latching on permanently and physically becoming a part of the female which grows around the male, and the male atrophies to the point where it is just a set of reproductive organs.
 
Mary Kay Letourneau comes to mind... had an affair with her 12 year old student. Gave birth to his children in prison, then married him after her release and they're still together. You might think it's sick and wrong, especially since the student-teacher bond was violated, but objectively and biologically that age gap wasn't an issue. Go back a hundred years or so and it was even a common event.

Ironically, the age of consent for men is/was higher than females in a lot of cases - 21. My father needed special permission to get married when they were both 20. So it's kind of sexist to assume this only applies to males having relationship with girls, it goes both ways.

I think it's the modern sociological conundrum in our society that deems whether or not something like this is taboo. There's no "right of passage" anymore. For girls, they celebrate a "sweet 16" where they get a bunch of flowers, candy and gifts, but that's a far cry from introducing them to adulthood. On their 18th birthday, boys (in the US) are assigned a selective service card/number that enables them to be drafted for military service; so their message" Go die for your country but God forbid you ever have sex!". There's nothing a child goes through that now says "Congratulations, you're now an adult.".

Even movie/video game ratings place "blood and gore" at a lower level than "sex and nudity". A PG13 movie can show someone being impaled on a sword, but swap it for a nude love scene and it becomes an R rating. So we'd rather our kids grow up being desensitized to seeing violence and ultra-sensitive to nudity. Make it forbidden to enter an adult book store until that magical age of 18, because... um... 16 year olds are too young to understand what sex is?

The entire concept that there's a certain, magical, arbitrary age where sex goes from being taboo to being natural defies logic. If anything, it varies based on the person's own ability and development not a legal age range that someone makes up based on their personal values.
 
I agree that the way things are now with education and resources is fucked up. But within the system we have now, younger people should be offered that protection, and the law is there because it gives people protection if they need it. I started a relationship with a man who was significantly older than me when I was under the age of consent here in Canada (16), and maybe it's because it may be lower here than in some other places, but I didn't complain about it or feel that it was a bad thing to have. We waited until I passed the age of consent to do anything, but really, couples can easily break the law if they want to and just make sure that anyone who cares doesn't find out. But for those circumstances where the minor could be coerced or lured in some way, the law is there because it would be unfortunate to have somebody older taking advantage of them and already having their life ruined when they're so young; it's there to deter perps and vindicate victims should they feel the need for it, and to get people to think seriously about the weightiness of what they may be getting themselves into.

If people were a lot better educated about sex, humanity, and all the related implications from a younger age so that they would be made more informed and less vulnerable, and things were totally different, then I think a change in how things are working now could be warranted. Science has shown that people make bad decisions and that their brains haven't developed to near their max up until their early 20s, but I don't think that should be an excuse to coddle people in our society forever. If we want to evolve and improve in our abilities as a society and as a species, we have to find ways to help ourselves move past what we currently perceive as our intellectual restrictions.
 
The entire concept that there's a certain, magical, arbitrary age where sex goes from being taboo to being natural defies logic. If anything, it varies based on the person's own ability and development not a legal age range that someone makes up based on their personal values.

I don't think there is any magical number that applies to everyone, but you can't have different rules based on characteristics. Furthermore, I think it is quite easy to go fuck up your life if you are premature, so personally I get why there are rules. The rules also protects from the abusive situations.
 
[MENTION=2890]Lerxst[/MENTION]

You'll find that everything is like this, as all laws and norms appeal to some ideal state of things.

It's often meant for the common good, but 'good' is subjective. For example some might attempt theorize that there are rational reasons to not kill each other, but this actually isn't the case. It only appears rational if you subjectively value life.

Such values cannot be built out of logic. This is why psychopaths are so problematic for non-psychopaths because without a sense of values or remorse, there's truly no logical reason to not do whatever the hell you want.
 
In marriage; parents ought to provide their children their physiological and safety needs. There is no reason today for anyone else to step in and take over that role. Anyone wanting to step in and take that kind of control over child isn't looking out for their best interests, and neither are the parents that allow it.

Consent to sex depends imo on each individual circumstance. I wouldn't call deviance what is currently called deviance in regards to sexual consent and minors. However, those laws are there to protect the young and vulnerable from those who would exploit and manipulate the young and the vulnerable.
 
Anyone wanting to step in and take that kind of control over child isn't looking out for their best interests, and neither are the parents that allow it.

I think this is the real issue. I don't think it is just a matter of age but motives and intent. A 40 year old looking at a 16 or 17 year old is for the most part not interested in looking out for his young partners best interest. They are usually interested in sex, exploiting what they believe is innocence. They are not concerned about protecting their partner. It's all about using the partner to get something they need emotionally or physically. Also, younger, eager, innocent partners are morely likely to be submissive and docile. They are more adoring or flattered by the attention they receive from older partners? Seriously, who wouldn't want that? And younger partners have the tendency to equate dating an older partner with more maturity assuming the older partner is naturally more mature and responsible because they are older, so it becomes like a feather in their cap to say or show they can date someone older. In many cases, the older partner defines the relationship or dictates the roles and expectations because they are seen as more "experienced". This kind of relationship is not one of equality or mutual independence. This does not mean of course that younger partners are not capable of manipulating their much older partners and taking advantage, but in most cases, it's usually the older who has more power and of course is more capable of abusing the trust of the younger partner.
 
Last edited:
I think that consent to have sex and consent to get married are two very very different things. 15 seems a reasonable age, to me, for a young person to engage in a sexual life. Some people may start earlier. I wasnt interested until i was 16, which also happens to be the age of consent where i live. A 16 year old can be charged with statutory rape if he/she has consensual sex with a 15 year old here- that seems pretty stupid to me. In my experience, most young teenagers are interested in people their own age, rather than those that are considerably older.

Older people may find teenagers attractive and teenagers may find older people attractive. It is what it is- not good or bad. If two people consent to have sex, then thats up to them. But obviously, there's going to be maturity and developmental differences. Life experience can make the world of difference. However, maturity is a very personal and idiosyncratic thing- everyone matures differently.

Where it gets tricky is when relationships and 'marriage' become involved. While i can easily justify two 15 year olds trying to have a relationship, i find it less acceptable for a 15 year old to have a relationship with someone much older. This is because i assume there will be an incompatibility of experience and that the 15 year old could get taken advantage of, or find themselves in a different style of parent/child relationship without ever having the grace period to just grow and become aware of themselves as an individual. Of course, this really does depend on the individuals involved. But generally speaking, i think there is potential for this situation to adversely effect the younger party.

In my opnion, i think it would be better for young people to only engage in casual relationships. I would encourage them to make lots of friends, date, have sex if they really want to, but be hesistant to become involved in any kind of serious committed sexual relationship. For me, the 'ideal' is to have an idea of yourself, who you are, what you want, and become relatively independant before choosing to commit yourself to another. That way when when people do enter a relationship its because they've chosen to, rather than something they've just fallen into. And there is less chance of the relationship becoming codependant or parisitic. Too many people get into relationships because they feel insecure and want to depend on someone else, or they want to derive their sense of self worth/vailidity from another. Or because they are just fumbling around trying to understand who they are and dont want to be alone. Or because they just want to have regular sex. Personally, i dont believe that this is healthy.

I also believe that children should be taught about healthy communication and relationships at school, from an early age. No child should believe that it is acceptable for them to be verbally, emotionally, psychologically or physically abused, either by their parents, other authority figures or their peers. Children should be taught to think critically, to question and assess data. And learn how to be self aware, how to listen to others and how to be heard themselves. And ideally, all children should have someone they can be completely honest with, who will not judge them, someone the child can trust and confide in. Because the saddest thing that happens is not necessarily that a child is harmed/abused, but that the child has no one in his/her life that she/he can trust enough to confide in so that the child can change the situation. This culture of shame and sexual repression can breed many problems and protect sexual perpertraters. And sexual health is an absolutely essential part of education; sexual health is crucial to the individual's health, the health of the community and the health of the future generation. Condoms and std tests save and preserve life. In truth, 'sexual health' should just be called 'health'.

Humans are sexual beings. Sex is the only reason we are here at all. Fucking makes the world go around. It is a natural drive. It starts fairly early in our lifespan; we have sexual urges before we reach emotional, psychological or physical maturity. This doesnt mean that we should ignore our sexual desires, that is repression and it is unhealthy. It doesnt mean we should go all out, this is bound to lead to abuse, confusion and mess. What we really need is some honesty, transperancy and proper communication. Younger people should be able to explore their sexuality in a safe and joyous way. Older generations should give younger people the space, grace, and guidance to mature and become independant, to become aware of themselves as individuals. As a culture, we should protect and preserve the right for young people to grow and mature without harassment and exploitation from older people.

And sex and relationships should be looked at more objectively and separately. When we bundle the two together we just get confusion, chaos, heart break and dysfunction. Just because people have sex does not mean that they are immediately in a relationship or should then have a relationship. Sex does not imply a close bond or instant intimacy. Sex should not necessarily be the primary reason that people have relationships. A healthy relationship is far more involved than just attraction and sex. True friendship, connection, understanding, communication and trust are the basis for a healthy relationship. Not just having a relaible fuck! We have some ridiculous ideas about sex and relationsips in our culture that result in many miserable people and many miserable people having children and then the cycle continuing again. Take some time to choose your mate. Take some time to choose before you have a sexual encounter and absolutely take as much time as you need before having a relationship. To all the men and women out there that complain about lack of committment from their lovers/partners- why on earth would you want to commit to someone that doesnt know if they want to committ to you? Dont you deserve someone that actually wants to comitt willingly? Doesnt that other person deserve the space to understand themselves better before they enter into an non voluntary obligation? This is someone that you are going to be investing a lot of time and energy into, a lot of yourself into! So think first, before you choose. You would think a lot before you jumped into a serious financial investment; relationships are so much more serious. Sex can be part of a healthy relationship, but sex, in itself, is not and should not be the basis of a functional relationship.

Which brings me to marriage. Marriage...Personally, i do not believe in marriage. As a concept i find it completely incompatible with my beliefs and values. However unhealthy i personally find it, i support the wish and the right of any two consenting adults to marry. Marriage is a contract, effectively a life long one. In times past it has been used for all sorts of cultural, societal, financial and religious reasons. This is definately not a contract that should just be based on sexual urges, or sexual maturity alone. Individuals that wish to sign this contract should consider physical, emotional, psychological and sexual maturity, as well as compatibility. This is a very important decision and committment that should not be entered onto lightly or ignorantly. It is much more serious than entering into a contract with a bank for 15 years to purchase a house, and can have much worse and longer lasting consequences. I dont really know what an appropriate marriageable age is. In my biased opinion, i would suggest atleast 25. But then again people are old enough to work and pay taxes at age 16. Thy can drive and in some places drink alcohol and shoot weapons and engage in war. Some people are more of less independant by the age of 16. I believe people should be allowed to vote at age 16. But i still have serious reservations about the wisdom of letting people under the age of 25 enter into marriage contracts.
 
No body is perfect when you marry them (and they are even less perfect when you get to know them). Being "fully adult" i.e. capable of fully independent thought, 25 to have a fully developed brain, having zero reservations, completed all the necessary young adult activities like high school- college- established their career- sewn your wild oats, I think these are not necessary. Your first marriage is going to be fucked up probably. You may even get divorced. I say get the shitty marriage out of the way early. Young couples just cheat a lot anyways, accept it. Maybe you will end up sticking with that person for life, maybe not but it's not a big deal.

Second or even fifth marriages are where it's at.
 
getting married as a teen is different than being sexually active as a teen.
my personal thought on it is that young women should be able to decide when they are ready to be sexually active - usually that is around 15 or 16, and the laws here reflect that. actually i think the cut off for statutory rape here is 14. anyway, marriage is not the same - giving up your youth to a man three decades older is a waste of a life. there could be no meeting of the minds as far as i'm concerned.
i'm not a big fan of marriage, although i was married for twenty years, but if you're going to get married at least wait until you have gotten some life experiences under your belt to bring to that relationship.
i don't believe that is possible when you are still a teenager.
jmo
 
First, this view will not be understood by many but here goes . . . I think this has to take into account cultural views or expectations of young adults vs. adults (25+) who are more informally treated as "real" adults capable of not only making decisions but accepting and bearing responsibility for decisions, something most teens are considered unable to fully do because of still growing minds and bodies at that age. At the same time, there's a gross oversimplification of sex today which implies that it's just an act that anyone at anytime can decide is right or not right for them to pursue. This assumes we always know and are capable of knowing what's best for us simply based on feelings or desires. Simply because a young woman or young man think they're ready for sex doesn't mean they are. Yes, they can get over it if it wasn't what they expected but it can have unintended consequences if engaged in earlier than someone would like. Unfortunately, feelings or desires are not always great at making good judgments. High tendency to over casualize sex and describe it as something that doesn't have consequences unless you're incapable of learning how to do it without being affected by it emotionally. That's apparently some mark of maturity that anyone can have sex and not have any meaning attached to it except pleasure. It's ignores the naturally intimate and emotional nature of sex which isn't meant to be a momentary experience. Sex was made for something lasting, not short term or temporary. So, age of consent is merely a technical designation which recognizes a philosophical, individual, and legal right to make a decision about one's body. But it doesn't in any way indicate that someone is capable of handling the consequences of those decisions if they are not aware of and understand the full meaning of the act and the potential effects. Even as a full adult, sex is not simple and can have complicated effects for anyone even those who claim to be above it all and unaffected by anything. In other words, having the right to make a choice doesn't mean someone is ready to make that choice. We can write all we want about being independent and doing whatever we want, but if someone doesn't have the complete picture, something which was meant to be meaningful and valuable can devolve into something physically pleasing but emotionally manipulative. Sex can have effects and consequences (besides the medical or health) which can affect someone for a long time whether or not they realized it. Another thing to consider is the idea that sex is a right of passage. Young adults are being given the message today that having sex is a necessity to be a full or confident adult, so they may rush into having sex to make that decision early on because they have this idea that it will make them more of man or woman sooner rather than later. It can then lead to the idea that it's not that big a deal once you have sex, yet it means so much. If not, we wouldn't have age limits guiding it. Too many young adults are given the impression that they're not a real man or woman unless they've fully explored their sexuality at a young age. When they do have those experiences, they start to feel grown up and believe they have a responsibility to engage in sexual behavior without any guidelines for how to approach it. There's a social and ethical aspect to sex which many like to ignore and pretend doesn't exist leading some to think it's good to give young adults the impression that having sex means they have "reached" some heightened understanding of the world without considering how casual attitudes can affect their ability to have healthy social and sexually healthy behavior with partners in long term relationships in the future.
 
[MENTION=1669]Maven[/MENTION]
it may seem that my response is contradictory to yours, but i agree with what you said
that is basically the discussion i had with my daughter when she decided to become sexually active. i should clarify that while i believe that young women have the sole right to their own sexuality i also feel that they should make those decisions with an informed and educated mind.