To think the age of consent should be raised to 18 if there is a significant age gap?

The law should be half your age plus seven. With the AOC remaining at 16. So (for instance) it would be legal for an 18 and 16 year old to have sex but not for anyone older than 18 to have sex with a 16 year old.

When my parents met they were 17 and 27. They are still happily married now.
i had a bf who was 22 when i was 16. Looking back, apart from my husband that was my healthiest and happiest relationship. I fondly look back at this time and wouldnt wanna change it at all.

And if she says they are not having sex?

I think emotional maturity varies, it could quite easily be an issue of someone who is 24 with a 23 year old. So I disagree.

IMO It should just be 18 regardless. Not just in age gap situations.

16 year olds are not, in my opinion, emotionally mature enough to fully understand the nuances and contexts of a sexual relationship.
But the current age allows certain people to dismiss their predatory behaviour, eh.

It's 18 in some states.
16 or 17 in other states.
However some states (including California) have no minimum age for marriage providing parents/guardians and a Judge agrees to it happening. Once married sex is legal.
So a 13,14 or 15 year girl old (or actually even younger) can legally get married and have sex with a considerably older man.
I really don't think America "has it right" 🤔

They already have that law in some states in America, I think they call it a Romeo and Juliet law. I think its a good idea.

I actually thought that it was! Or I may be thinking about rules surrounding those in particular roles, and positions - like a power imbalance.

I think it is hard to legislate for specific scenarios. You have picked one because you know someone in that situation but someone else would ban all age gaps of say 10 years + and someone else would come up with something else. I don't think this is a widespread enough problem worth changing the law over.

I also don't think common sense kicks in at 18. If you are romanticising at 16 you are probably still doing it at 18 or 21. Same if you have an unhealthy idea about relationships. Loads of women (and some men) end up in coercive, controling or otherwise abusive relationships and they aren't all teenagers and not all of those relationships have a big age gap. I think better education around what healthy relationships should look like and how to identify a power imbalance, co-ercive controil etc would be much more useful than changing the law.

At 17, my boyfriend was 27. Of course my parents were unhappy but after initially banning him from the house, they decided to get over it. We were together 3 years. We split up because I decided he was a bit of a nob with no prospects and I had pretty much outgrown him, not because he was 10 years older than me. I am not sure things would have been any different if I had happened to meet him 8 months later when I was 18.

Some people are just attracted to people who are a bit older/younger. Most of my relationships have been with older men. I spent 5 years with someone I met at 21 who was 9 years older than me and then had a long marriage to someone I met in my late 20s who was 7 years older.

I guess if it works in other countries then there'd be no harm in it. I just felt it could complicate things legally but maybe not.

Yes, much of the US, Canada, Australia and Germany. Possibly more.

They’re enforced the usual way. Sorry, I’m probably being a bit thick, but I don’t really understand the question?

Do they? How does it get enforced?

Age of consent should be 18; the one thing America actually has right.

You can't have a law that says you can consent to one person but not another based on their birth certificate.

Lots of places have (and enforce) Romeo and Juliet laws.

Either it’s the age of consent or it’s not regardless of an age gap. You can’t just change it around like that . Either someone is allowed to make a decision themselves or they are not .

So, in a couple of years, when your DD is 16, would you be happy if she had a boyfriend who was pushing 30? Would her dad be happy about it?

My first husband was 8 years older than me. I met him as a teen. No grooming, no abuse, nothing like that. 🙄. We ran out of steam with the martiage, after 28 years, but that’s just life. 🤷‍♀️

Maybe. I do see the distinction you're making.

You say the police couldn't get involved unless the girl herself reported it - Im not sure this is true, from various cases Ive heard about with DV and coercive control its not always the victim that reports it. And the days of 'not pressing charges' where an abuse gets off because the victim can't cope with the legal process are thankfully long gone. The crown pursues the case, not the victim.

if the parents reported the guy, i don't see why the police couldn't speak to the girl, and then depending what she's said, speak to the bloke?

I do appreciate that you can't have 'soft laws' which are open to interpretation, or pre emptive police involvement. But isn't this how young women are being failed by the system - red flag situations are ignored because 'she consented'. I can't help thinking we must be able to do better, especially in the wake of the rape gangs horror.

I actually agreed but didn't see 24 as significant.
So the variation in what is considered significant can vary.
I also see 24yr olds that have been working several years v 24yr olds fresh out of uni and they are very different in life experience so it cant just be straight up age thing

I would raise the AoC to 18 and stop there. You can't police people forever, though no doubt many would feel 18 yo in a relationship with a 35 yo was equally repellant and want that legislated for too.

I've seen posters on MN arguing that an older man dating women in their 20s is morally repugnant because the human brain "isn't fully developed til they're 25" and women in their 20s "look like babies" to the posters.

We need to stop infantilising adults somewhere and I think 18 as a hard stop for state interference in consensual adult relationships is a good place.

True

Age of consent does not equal age of no longer capable of bad ideas or unhealthy relationships. If you want it to be illegal to have sex unless all possibility of harm is eliminated then you just want it to illegal to have sex. Age of consent laws are about protecting children who are not yet developed enough to consent, not restrict young adults from making decisions about their own sexual wants.

A 16 year old is old enough to make decisions about their own body, including consenting to sex. Some of those teenagers may make decisions I wouldn't personally agree with, but there are 40 year olds making sexual decisions I don't agree with, but it is their questionable decisions to make.
If a 16 year old is in an abusive or exploitative relationship, that should be adressed by laws against domestic abuse, just like it should be if a 40 year old.

If you want to prevent harm, adress the harm and the people causing it, don't try and impose unreasonable restrictions on the rights of all young women to make their own choices (and from your comments its very clear that your motivation is focused around restricting young women, not young people in general).

You're comparing apples and oranges in terms of what the police would do

No police officer is going to speak to someone on the basis that someones mum says 'he's in a relationship with my daughter'

Firstly they want to hear from the potential victim. If that victim says nothing, nothing doing

Secondly, being in a relationship is not a crime and your version of the chat is akin to someone visiting to say 'you're in a relationship and thats fine, but just to make you aware that if you punch her in the face then thats a crime'

Police dont go round talking to people about theoretical things that they have no victim statement about.

You made a specific allegation or complaint about yourself which enabled them to do that

If you report a crime, the police can go and speak to the person about it. This it's not an arrest or even voluntary interview, it's a casual 'this is what we expect, if you do/ don't do this thing you'll likely get in trouble'.

'We understand you're in a relationship with x which is fine, but are you aware she's below the age of consent and therefore sex with her would be a crime? '

No criminal record obviously because no evidence of wrong doing.

They did this when I reported a guy who was harassing me and threatening me, but below the threshold to make an arrest. Similarly when I was younger and an ex bf was harassing me.

If someone is acting out of ignorance, it can stop them. If they know what they're doing but trying it on it can shock them out of it. If they continue and end up getting arrested, it doesn't look good that they've already been told to stop.

Obviously it wouldn't get as far as court if no allegations from the girl (I'm imaging parents have reported) but it might not need to.