Anonymous #2 8w

youth are not being oppressed by not letting adults have sex with them. you have to draw the line somewhere, so yeah it’s arbitrary, but i’d rather err on the side of grown men not preying on high school students, wouldn’t you?

11

Anonymous #3 8w

So you're okay with a government enforcing laws not based on actual criminal action or even with a basis in the real world? That 'arbitrary line' was used to send people to their deaths and suppress their free speech, both things I summed you would be against

-2

Anonymous #2 8w

*Assumed*

-1

Anonymous #2 8w

Nah it honestly makes sense 18 is the age of majority and the age in which most people graduate high school. It’s kind of arbitrary but the end of mandatory school is when you’re considered an adult which makes some sense.

3

Anonymous #4 8w

Age of majority by statute, in other words ' because the government said so'. Please show the evidence that the brain immediately updates the midnight of one's 18th birthday or admit that you want government defining reality

-1

Anonymous #2 8w

It doesn’t but it stops things like teachers have sexual relationships with their students being considered normal. I don’t know why you want it to be lower so bad man.

1

Anonymous #4 8w

Strawman - I never argued for decreasing, but focusing on proven criminal actions instead of blanket restrictions based on demographics

-1

Anonymous #2 8w

What does that even mean, like what would you do in order to decrease the amount of cases of children being sexually abused. How does changing the age of consent or making it non binding help that in any way?

3

Anonymous #4 8w

Idk maybe restore presumption of innocence in criminal court and actually going though investigative procedures that respect equal protection under the law? Also, stop manufacturing definitions for SA?

-2

Anonymous #2 8w

So give pedophiles the benefit of the doubt, I don’t know bro. I’m not trying to straw man you but I just don’t get what you’re saying. How does that create fewer victims of childhood SA if we just stop defining SA?

5

Anonymous #4 8w

You're calling 'presumption of innocence' a benefit of doubt? I don't like lawyers, but even I respect this principle more than any lawyer ever. Also, there's concrete definitions to SA that negate bodily autonomy. People like you want to call any form of contact between people with a single year of age difference 'gr00ming' - a manufactured term.

-1

Anonymous #2 8w

No grooming does exist you’re just being weird bro there are obviously cases wherever Romeo and Juliet laws should apply but you seem to just have really weird ideas on who can consent like a 12 year old who is "mature”should be able to have sex with adults.

1

Anonymous #4 8w

Romeo/Juillet laws only came about because people saw statutory laws as tyrannical. But plenty of true intellectuals recognized the tyranny inherent with those and other statutes - especially those in France - yet you want to use the laws similar to that of Dred Scott to override any real circumstances.

-2

Anonymous #2 8w

Yeah and while we’re at why don’t we have 14 year olds driving cars and 16 year olds voting and 15 year olds going into the military or holding full time jobs. It’s all just arbitrary anyways. Why even have a cutoff at all?

5

Anonymous #2 8w

France made "Cuties" bro point invalid.

-1

Anonymous #5 8w

WASP psychologists explicitly infused Victorian morals into their work, so people expressing discontent get labeled as 'the worst of the worst' solely for disagreeing

1

Anonymous #4 8w

Oh boy producing a movie means that logical arguments become invalid

1

Anonymous #2 8w

The fact you think it’s just a movie says a lot.

0

Anonymous #4 8w

' says a lot'.... source?

1

Anonymous #2 8w

Hey listen man if you want to advocate for lowering the age to vote, drive, work, etc., maybe I’ll hear you out. You brought up this whole “arbitrary line” thing with regard to having sex with minors. Let me ask, what do you think should be done about this? What should the age of consent be? Should there be one at all?

3

Anonymous #2 8w

The brain continues development until age 23. 18 is a good blanket cutoff for maturity levels. SOME of them may be mature but for middle and upper class families that live lives with no external struggles that forces kids to mature 18 year olds still have the brains of children and are able to be manipulated by older people pretty easily.

0

Anonymous #5 8w

We shouldn't assume youth as brain dead until 15/6/7/8 since that's been disproven. We shouldn't have juvenile laws that contradict the 14th amendment. We shouldn't criminalize known biological urges for anyone. And we should cultivate intellect not based on how many rotations around the sun you've made.

0

Anonymous #2 8w

Ok so in tangible, actionable terms, what would you do about it? What laws would you change?

3

Anonymous #6 8w

Oh so maturity is now based on class dynamics? Gtfo here

-1

Anonymous #2 8w

There may be SOME truly mature people but dude teenage brains are highly malleable and susceptible to outside influence. A really good example is the effects of the right wing pipeline on the brain of teenage boys who “grow out of it” a few years later. Every teenager that gets groomed by an older person heavily regrets that past after maturing in their 20s

1

Anonymous #5 8w

Abolish the troubled teen industry, which is just religious sexual oppression - Mandate expansive sex education that doesn't demonize age gaps - Lower the voting age progressively with expanded civics education/coursework - Self-defense courses that cover verbal attacks - Recognize naturism

-1

Anonymous #2 8w

But see you keep dancing around it. I want you to say with your full chest “we should eliminate the age of consent” or “we should lower the age of consent to 12.” It’s not a policy to “recognize naturism.” And there’s no amount of “sex education” you can give immature children that will equip them to consent to sex with adults. You know that what you want to say is fucked up and that’s why you won’t do it

6

Anonymous #2 8w

lmao those intellectuals were fucking pedophiles dude. french continental philosophers opposed the age of consent because many of them were pedos.

6

Anonymous #2 8w

“doesn’t demonize age gaps” large age gaps should be demonized dude. just say you think adults should fuck kids

5

Anonymous #5 8w

You just want a damn gotcha above true debate, which is NOT just 'dancing around'

0

Anonymous #3 8w

So contributing to the advancement of knowledge gets that knowledge voided because of implementing social norms?

-1

Anonymous #2 8w

no… but their contributions mostly sucked. french postmodernist philosophy is just reactionary slop. a lot of big words saying little of substance and a craven rejection of marxism

2

Anonymous #2 8w

I agree with most of what you said besides lower the voting age. When I was 14 I was one of the most well versed politically on my graduating class and I still didn’t understand the vast majority of politics at that time. Most kids are repeating verbatim their parents viewpoints. If anything the voting age and age of consent should be increased to reflect the general age when the frontal lobe closes

1