Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

To think the age of consent should be 18?

33 replies

enemaofthestate · 09/07/2023 19:18

The discussions about a certain news story have got me thinking about the discrepancy between the fact indecent images of 16-17-year-olds are classed as children/illegal but those same children are above the age of consent in law.

So a grown man could be breaking the law by having an indecent photo of a 17-year-old girl, yet still legally be allowed to have a sexual relationship with her, despite the fact everyone can see it is inappropriate and wrong.

Surely if the law can recognise one is wrong then it should apply to both???

OP posts:

PlatBilledDuckypuss · 10/07/2023 07:48

dressornot · 09/07/2023 19:22

Personally if there was a way of saying,

16+ but if one person is 16 or 17, then their partner may be no older than 18.

Otherwise 18+ for any ages.

I think that would be best

The Italians use this basis, I believe. There the age is 13.

winteriscoming2022 · 10/07/2023 07:53

I was 16, my boyfriend 21 when we first had sex. The majority of my friends had been sexually active since around 14. I went on to my marry my bf, were together twenty years and had two children. How on earth would changing the age of consent be a positive move? Having brought up numerous teenagers ( mine plus looking after them) I can assure you that the majority will become sexually active at around 16

LlynTegid · 10/07/2023 08:22

The age of consent should depend on the age of the other person in part. So two 16 year olds having a relationship fine, perhaps for 16 and 17 year olds the other person must be 21 or under.

Gerrataere · 10/07/2023 08:29

I agree with others, it should be relative. No adult should be going near teenagers, but once they hit 16 the cries of ‘well it’s legal innit’ are deafening. Anyone 20+ looking for a sexual connection with someone still at school is an absolute red flag at best. It still leads to grooming but proving it is near impossible. Teenagers will do what teens do, and with each other shouldn’t be against the law. An adult (let’s face it, men in the majority) shouldn’t be anywhere near a teenager though.

Doagooddeed · 10/07/2023 08:43

enemaofthestate · 09/07/2023 19:33

But what about older adults with younger people?

How can it be illegal for a 50-year-old man to possess an indecent photo of a 17-year-old girl… yet okay for him to be in a sexual relationship with the very same girl?

If we regard the first one as wrong then why not the second?

That is more what I’m thinking of rather than younger teens sleeping with each other.

Show quote history

One cannot state an age limit on who can sleep with a 16yo or even an 18yo.

I think the upper age limit on indecent images is probably due to the ability of older men to exploit younger people over the internet, few 16yo in real life would want to sleep with a 50yo,

Or knowing how the Govt has not been working over the last few years, the person who drafted the law, thought the age of consent was 18.

Noicant · 10/07/2023 08:43

MeMyselfandI2 · 09/07/2023 20:10

I grew up in the western United States. The age of consent was 18, but realistically teenagers had sex all the time and there wasn’t prosecution of teenagers having sex with each other. Adults having sexual contact with teenagers was broken down in three categories: under 13, 14-15, and 16-17. These are statutory crimes which mean if the events are proven to have occurred there is no defense - the crime occurred and the penalty should be imposed.

Under 13, anyone over 18 is subject to criminal penalties.

14-15, anyone over 18 is subject to criminal penalties but the level of penalty is two tiered. If more than 4 years age difference one penalty and less than 4 years age difference another penalty.

16-17, a little more nuanced. If the person knows or reasonably should have known the minors age and is less than 9 years older than the minor one penalty. If more than 10 years older (full stop) than another penalty.

This seems to me to recognize teenagers need to be protected at different ages in different ways. The real problem is lack of reporting and failure to prosecute sometimes. But overall I think something similar to this is a good balance.

Sounds sensible

JazbayGrapes · 10/07/2023 09:09

no. 16 is fair enough and it would be counterproductive to criminalize young lovers.

thing as selling nudes though - age should be increased to 21 at least.

1Gadfly · 19/09/2023 08:09

The law is there to protect children from adults. Children are not prosecuted for having sex with their peers. It would be v difficult to justify any prosecution of consenting children on public internet grounds.

Flip

1 2