To think some people are SUCH hypocrites about historical age of consent

(87 Posts)
RestlessSoul Mon 09-Sep-13 18:49:33

Today I was reading about age of consent in the past out of curiosity after a remark from an American friend of a friend about Prophet Mohamed's relationship with his wife Aisha and how simply awful & barbaric it was that she was only 9, accusations of pedophilia etc.

After googling and reading about historical ages of consent around the world, I am confused with this person. What an idiot. They don't even know their own history.

In 1880 in the US just 133 years ago the age of consent in Delaware was 7 shock. In most other states it was 10 and in a few 12.

I don't understand what he is pontificating about when his home state Georgia allowed grown adult men to freely sleep with 10 year old girls in 1880. And he is condemning something that happened 1400+ years ago.


VaultFullOfTwizzlers Mon 09-Sep-13 23:28:17

December the eighth, when my former boss would take assembly and make an absolute tit of himself in terms of religious knowledge.

<happy sigh>

StephenFrySaidSo Mon 09-Sep-13 23:41:11

OP do you know what the word hypocrite means? why does the historical age of consent in America make that man an idiot? he did not create those laws nor exist in those time. he was talking about 1 man.

also- do people really actually believe that there was an 'immaculate conception'? confused i thought everyone (above the age of 12ish) knew that it wasn't true. i'm a bit gobsmacked that people are actually debating this as if it is fact!

VaultFullOfTwizzlers Mon 09-Sep-13 23:44:15

TheYoniWayIsUp it is all in the link.

Mary, not Jesus, was the Immaculate Conception.

ivykaty44 Tue 10-Sep-13 20:18:52

garlicbaguette I was talking about shot gun weddings in young teens, not rape but consenting sex between two teens and then the girl getting pg and having to get married. As the age you could get married was under 16 they could do so with parents permission up until 1929.

Basil seems to think the age of consent was only for unmarried people as the age you could get married was under 16 until 1929 and they wouldn't get married and not have sex iyswim.

VaultFullOfTwizzlers Tue 10-Sep-13 20:33:34

Stephen I certainly don't believe it but it is useful to know what so many people did believe in the past and do now, I think.

My DD had a catholic education and I think it will stand her in good stead for studying history or literature in the future. Not to mention politics.

IrisWildthyme Tue 10-Sep-13 20:34:00

Ach Princess you got there first. That was what I was about to say.
The Immaculate Conception is required by Catholic Doctrine as Mary is supposed to be pure and sin-free and untainted by the same old original sint he rest of us have even if we never get around to any proper sinning.

StephenFrySaidSo Tue 10-Sep-13 20:59:12

ah! thanks for explaining vault i was genuinely confused

BasilBabyEater Tue 10-Sep-13 21:01:12

I think it must have been Ivykaty.

The age of consent was definitely placed at 16 in 1885.

But that clause in that little article I linked to was clear that marriage took priority over age of consent (and rape laws) shock

Also AFAIK the age of consent only applied to females. I've never seen anything about age of consent for males except after the legalisation of homosexuality between men.

VaultFullOfTwizzlers Tue 10-Sep-13 21:43:45

I really should have clarified, Stephen - got carried away!

And there is an inappropriate lol to one of Basil's post from me which I don't understand. Can everyone please ignore it? HQ have better things to do I'm sure.

VaultFullOfTwizzlers Tue 10-Sep-13 21:49:42

Oh - I was lolling at Basil's autogenesis rather than the horrific story.

I really should go to bed but won't

TheUglyFuckling Tue 10-Sep-13 21:53:00

historically speaking it was perfectly legal to marry very young children together. But, their parents weren't stupid and realised that a young girl of 11 or 12 wasn't physically developed enough to successfully deliver a baby, even if she was old enough to conceive.

Margaret Beaufort was very much an exception in having henry Tudor when she was only 13. but her family were determined to get a Lancaster heir as soon as possible and were prepared to risk Margaret's health to gain that end.

King John married Isabella of Angouleme when she was only 12 and presumably had sex with her from the start as people were shocked and disapproved. She didn't have her first baby until her early twenties so it's quite possible that she wasn't even menstruating when King John married her sad

typically married girls would wait until they were considered 'fully formed' before being allowed to have sex with their husbands. So it was quite common for girls as young as 14 or 15 to have babies and no one batted an eye.

Looking back I was fully physically developed by the time I was 15 and I wouldn't have had any problems carrying a baby or delivering it, I don't think.

TheUglyFuckling Tue 10-Sep-13 21:58:41

I also think that the concept of 'a protected childhood' is a relatively new concept and didn't really exist more than 150 years ago.

children as young as 6 were working full days in heavy industry such as mining or farming. young children were often executed for crimes. Couples married in their very early teens.

young children of nobles were often given as hostages. King John actually hanged several hostage children at Nottingham castle when Llewelyn of Wales broke his vow of allegience. The youngest child hanged was only 5 sad

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now