AIBU to think a lot of people miss the point of the age of consent?

[Gardencentregroupie]

It is NOT illegal for an under 16 to have sex. It is illegal to have sex with someone under 16. The law is for the protection of the minor not their persecution.

I blame Just 17 magazine. I remember it having "sex under 16 is illegal" at the top of their problem page. Missing the point big style, and possibly even encouraging a culture of victim blaming against under 16s who are coerced into sex against their will.

I wish the age of consent was higher. I am more than happy for Just 17 to say sex is illegal under the age of 16. It is actually protecting young girls from coercion or predetarors

YANBU. Young people need the facts and the fact is that when they are under 16 they are the victim of the person breaking the law, not the perpetrator of a crime. The logic is that they are not old enough to consent, so the other party has done something wrong, not them.

Yanbu

YANBU. To tell young people it is illegal for them to have sex under 16 might discourage them from reporting when they are being coerced or abused.

"It is an offence for anyone to have any sexual activity with a person under the age of 16. However, Home Office guidance is clear that there is no intention to prosecute teenagers under the age of 16 where both mutually agree and where they are of a similar age."

And of course teenagers or indeed children of any age are legally free to masturbate on their own.

YANBU.
Age of consent should be 21.

We sadly live in a world where any legally adult woman is assumed to want a penis in her vagina, by default, and has to prove that she did not, if/when she is raped.

This is shit, and girls should be protected from this misogyny as long as possible.

Age of consent for males should remain 16, or some other rules be created to guarantee punishment for a 20 year old man who rapes a girl under 16.

To tell young people it is illegal for them to have sex under 16 might discourage them from reporting when they are being coerced or abused.

Important point!

This framing the age of consent as a problem for teens reminds me of the attempts to frame the legalisation of sexual abuse of children as a legal right for children to be sexual.
(The Green Party in Germany actually went along with this nonsense for quite a while, trying to be progressive, until they realized that this was actually a lot of bullshit and pedophiles trying to make it look like they wanted to do children a favour.)

So as the law stands then, an under-16 girl could be coerced into sex by and under-16 boy and the law can't touch him. Unless the girl went to the police; but if she could be coerced into sex she's likely to be coerced out of going to the police . So in that scenario, thinking it is illegal might bolster the girl's refusal to have sex.

But yes, it could also prevent an under-16 girl from reporting coercion if she thinks she has broken the law. Which is a problem.

I think I would be in favour of a higher age of consent, probably 18. If you're not considered competent to enter a contract, how can you be competent to enter into a sexual relationship? (Yes, some will, but quite a lot won't.)

I think I would be in favour of a higher age of consent, probably 18. If you're not considered competent to enter a contract, how can you be competent to enter into a sexual relationship? (Yes, some will, but quite a lot won't.)

Age of consent for girls to consent to PiV should be raised way higher. How can a girl who is not competent to enter into a contract to buy a house possibly be competent to decide whether she wants to risk a pregnancy, and as consequence, either a hard decision on whether to have an abortion, or a forced birth (in countries where abortion is illegal). That is insane.

Does anywhere have a higher age of consent?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent#/media/File:Age_of_Consent_-_Global.svg

Many of the countries with a lower age of consent have some protections for minors, and the countries where extramarital sex is illegal punish rape victims, as we all know, so this map is to be taken with a grain of salt.

Another myth is statutory rape. It doesn't exist in U.K. law. At all. You cannot be prosecuted for it, jailed for it whatever. Because it doesn't exist.
In fact someone between the ages of 13-16 who has sex willingly with someone who is around the same age is unlikely to even have police involved and even if by some miracle they did I'd eat my hat if it got in front of a judge. However should a conviction be achieved it's "sexual activity" or "sexual intercourse" with a minor not stat rape.
Generally in those cases excluding rape it's a massive age gap (and I'm talking 30yr old and 13 year old) or grooming that will lead to a conviction

I would change the age of consent to 14 actually as long as your partner was under 18 and as now for under 16.