To think we should up the age of consent to 18?

[whatnet]

I just have this utterly sick feeling about the constant narrative pushed in the UK about a CHILD being ‘16’ and therefore, “what is your problem?”… “it’s ‘legal’” I am so sick of the exploitation of our girls in this country. Our CHILDREN. Our future. Who do not have a voice, because they are children. They need to be protected. I will pre empt some of your arguments. The UK government has classified the violence against Women and Girls as a “National Threat”

https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/tackling-violence-against-women-and-girls-in-the-uk/

A 16 year old girl is a child and should be protected as a child, by law.

100% agree.

I agree OP.

Logically it would make sense but you can get married at 16.
So while it's nuts that you can marry and have children but not be old enough to toast the bridesmaids or take your baby to softplay (children need supervised by over 18) .

It would be seriously illogical to allow marriage, but not sex.

Where I live, we have an interesting. compromise.

15 is the age of consent for teenagers aged 15-17. So a 15 or 16-year-old could legally sleep with their 17-year-old partner, but no one older.

If one partner is 18, the age of consent for both is raised to 18. It’s to prevent teenagers from being exploited by adults. I think it makes sense.

Our age of consent is already quite high at 16. Using it would achieve nothing other than making young adults hide their perfectly normal sexual relationships.

A more sensible solution in my opinion would be to give them more responsibility and stop babying them. 16 is old enough to go out and work full time and absolutely old enough to make sensible and informed decisions about your future and sex life as long as the young person has been enabled to do those things.

We are on the Isle of Man and for info a 16 year old here can drive and vote in our general election. Why shouldn’t they?

Sugarfree23 · Today 00:26

Logically it would make sense but you can get married at 16.
So while it's nuts that you can marry and have children but not be old enough to toast the bridesmaids or take your baby to softplay (children need supervised by over 18) .

It would be seriously illogical to allow marriage, but not sex.

Exactly, how utterly bonkers. How many 16 year olds do you know of that are getting married? As RB would urge you to do. See the bigger picture. It’s all a conspiracy. I’d say, let’s protect our lovely intelligent girls and give them a fighting chance in this patriarchal nonsense. I’m just waiting on the awakening 🤞🏻

It would be interesting to do a poll of all those posters who gave a flying fuck about the legal age of consent, before they had sex.

I was 15 he was 17. I didn't care what the law said, only what my hormones said.

I understand where you are coming from opening poster, in view of today's "news" about "Alice" being abused by RB, but raising the age of consent for girls, won't stop girls wanting sex.

Marriage is now 18 years of age.

It's a little like the idea that punters should be criminalised and prostitutes shouldn't. In the case that everyone is 'happy' with the interaction, no one makes a complaint and no one is prosecuted. In the case something happens, at least the punter is guilty of something.

Raising the age of consent gives the young women (typically) something to talk to the police about even if there's no proof of an assault. And something can be done to safeguard in coercive relationship. And you could have a staggered AoC for teenagers.

So yes, the age could be raised with thought and planning. Knowing that teenagers will still have sex when they have it.

except the average age teens begin having intercourse is 14. how do you plan on convincing them of the 4 year wait?

I agree something like that could work.

The problem with having a blanket age of consent of 16 is that certain kinds of adult men - often much older men, see it as a target knowing it's just over the legal threshold.

Those same men would still do the same thing with an 18 year old but at least an additional 2 years might better equip young people to handle those advances.

Yes, @user1471453601 a staggered age of consent for teenagers makes more sense.

Could you cite your source? TIA.

user1471453601 · Today 00:37

It would be interesting to do a poll of all those posters who gave a flying fuck about the legal age of consent, before they had sex.

I was 15 he was 17. I didn't care what the law said, only what my hormones said.

I understand where you are coming from opening poster, in view of today's "news" about "Alice" being abused by RB, but raising the age of consent for girls, won't stop girls wanting sex.

This is not about who is ‘wanting sex’ or ‘kids’ having sex. It’s about ‘consent’. From your post I am assuming you were both consensual? Not ideal, but also understandable. Teenagers will find a way. This is not what we are discussing. From what you are reporting, I assume you were both consensual and would have no reason to highlight any issue. The issue arises when a child is being exploited or abused. You have clearly stated that this was not your experience. I would like to see all children (under 18) protected by law in the UK.

But what happens when the 16 year old turns 17 and the 17 year old turns 18 and they've been having sex for 2 years already, is it suddenly illegal?

@OvaHere I think it’s helped my DD (18) and her friends to navigate their teenage years. They just haven’t considered older partners.

It does afford some protection for under-18’s when the consequences are harsh . An older partner would be put on a sex offender’s register and be guilty of statutory rape.

This is a great idea - avoids criminalising teenagers but stops predators. Where is this?

The point is to prosecute older men who have sex with 16yos.

Not stop 14yos from having sex with each other.

14, 15, 16 year olds will find a way to have sex if they want too. I am purposing that the legal age for consent is raised to 18 to protect children. This isn’t about sexual experimentation in teens, that will always happen. It’s about protecting our girls, who are labelled ‘adults’ and ready to give full consent at 16. This opens the floodgate for predators. Stop confusing the issue.

Gasp! How dare you insinuate that teenage girls want sex?🤣

I would support this. I am worried about protecting girls from predators, but I don't like the idea of criminalising teenagers for natural behaviour, and driving their sex lives underground seems like a stupid idea. It's a tricky area and the solution needs to be nuanced.

This is called Romeo and Juliet law and common in quite a few places.

@PieonaBarm I believe that some discretion can be exercised, but yes, technically it’s illegal. Whether anyone would actually prosecute is another matter.

The law is really to protect under-18’s from much older partners.

You needed parental consent to get married at 16. That was before Feb this year. It seems you have to be 18 in all cases now, which is a good thing.

I can't think of anything that you can do at 16 apart from sex now. Lottery tickets are now 18, drink at 18.

@Gothambutnotahamster America. Every state has their own laws, but that’s what we have.

It’s ironic, because we get so much wrong here (guns, for example!) but I do think this is a reasonable approach.