Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

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

404 replies

whatnet · 19/09/2023 00:10

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.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
whatnet · 01/10/2023 22:21

“Women won the vote, but the sexual double standard that 19th-century women fought against still persists and may well be patriarchy’s last, best tool. The age-of-consent campaigns that brought thousands of women into reform work and, ultimately, suffrage activism, show what is possible when women work together across racial, economic and ideological lines. Gardener and her colleagues longed for the day when women would be recognized as “self-respecting, self-directing human units with brains and bodies sacredly their own,” and the #MeToo movement carries on this long tradition of activism today.”

“but the sexual double standard that 19th-century women fought against still persists and may well be patriarchy’s last, best tool.”

It is, stop confusing the issue and stand up for our girls. Raise the age of consent to 18.

OP posts:
whatnet · 01/10/2023 22:50

So, for those on this thread who are desperately defending the young age of consent at 16 in the UK, I am interested to know your motivation? I am a mother of young daughters therefore I have an invested interest in this topic. There appears to be many posters talking about and sharing their own sexual experiences, despite the fact this is not the issue being discussed on this thread. It has been said many times that no one is interested in prosecuting teen to teen sexual encounters and CPS make it clear in their prosecuting guidelines that they are also not out to ‘criminalise’ teens. It seems that there is an even bigger problem in the UK than I had first anticipated. How very sad and dangerous for our children. It highlights how much our children must be protected by legislation.

OP posts:
BIossomtoes · 01/10/2023 23:00

You’ve been talking to yourself for two hours.

PosterBoy · 02/10/2023 02:54

My motivation?

Bloody hell I was absolutely horny as hell from 14. I used to masturbate about four times a day Wait til 18? Yeah right.

Some of you just don't like sex, imo.

Poptones · 02/10/2023 07:15

Because you annoy me.
You ignore the fact that 16-year-old girls are NOT in fact children but young women.

You ignore the fact that it is normal for young women to want sex with older guys - not 40-year-olds but older, in their early to mid 20s perhaps.

Yet you presumably want to waste precious police time prosecuting a 19-year-old guy for having sex with a 16-year-old.
Or a 17-year-old for having sex with a 23-year-old.

Who the fuck in their right mind thinks that is necessary? I mean really. They're ALL. YOUNG. PEOPLE.

That it is necessary to waste police time on that rather than chasing actual abusers?

That they've got to question young people, even though common sense tells them that they're roughly about the same age, because he may be 20 and her 17 and really nobody in their right mind would want to criminalise the guy

You don't even stipulate the age cap in spite of being asked many times! You've accused others of being thick, yet you don't realise the hours and hours of time it would take to decide upon a limit. Wasted time.

I mean why are you so obsessed with this? As a PP pointed out, you've been talking to yourself for hours.

16 suits the majority- end of.
The law is not there for outliers.

If you don't want your 16-year-old having sex with a 31-year-old then bring her up properly. It's not on the state.

Oh yeah and we're not in Kansas anymore, Toto.

Circe7 · 02/10/2023 07:53

@whatnet
I think you missed my point. As I understand it you want the law to introduce a blanket age of consent of 18 without a clause excusing sex between (say) a 17 year old and 18 year old. However you don’t actually want to prosecute an 18 year old under this law. You are therefore presumably relying on the CPS not to prosecute the 18 year old in these circumstances.

In my view, it isn’t appropriate for parliament to make legislation significantly wider than the circumstances that it is intended to cover and then direct the CPS not to prosecute in the majority of these cases. Legislation should be made by parliament as a matter of the rule of law - the CPS should not effectively decide on the age of consent via guidelines. It’s too fundamental an issue.

I don’t think Parliament would/ could make a law which would technically criminalise many young people for the “benign” activity of having sex with other young people who may be a year or so older and then just rely on CPS discretion. The first question in debates in parliament and from the public would be why is this law drafted to criminalise sex between consenting teenagers. Politically speaking MPs mostly aren’t going to say that they want sex between 17 year olds to be illegal but it would also look ridiculous for them to say they wanted to pass a law which would strictly apply in that situation in the hope it wouldn’t actually be applied. It’s like passing a law criminalising all sex with the intention that CPS will only use it in rape cases.

That isn’t an archaic outdated way of making law. It’s actually a more modern approach that law should be precise and only cover the behaviour you want to criminalise.

StarlightLady · 02/10/2023 08:08

I agree with @Circe 7. Legislation should not be introduced that the CPS are advised in part to ignore, that would cause extreme difficulties for the courts.

ln addition there appears to be an assumption throughout the thread that everyone is heterosexual. There are lots of gay and bi 16 and 17 year olds young men and women out there!

whatnet · 02/10/2023 22:42

“Could the UK reform the age of consent?
It has been a hot topic in recent months, particularly since it was revealed BBC presenter Huw Edwards was accused of paying a teenager for explicit photos - however there is currently no mainstream campaign looking to raise the age of consent to 18.
In July, Edwards was accused of paying a 17-year-old more than £35,000 to send him sexually explicit photographs.
The presenter also faced allegations that he stripped to his underwear during a video call with the youth, who is now aged 20.
The Metropolitan Police later said there was "no information to indicate a criminal offence had been committed".
Meanwhile, Phillip Schofield's career was left in tatters after he admitted having an affair with a young runner who worked on ITV's This Morning.
Although the pair met when the boy was 15, the presenter insisted a romantic relationship began five years later, when his lover was over the age of consent.
Romeo and Juliet laws
One option the UK could consider, if it did raise the age of consent, would be the introduction of "Romeo and Juliet laws".
In many US states, there is an exemption that a person can legally have consensual sex with a minor, provided that he or she is not a given number of years older (usually less than four). It would mean a 16-year-old and 17-year-old could legally have sex, despite being under the age of consent, but a 16-year-old and a 30-year-old could not.”

https://news.sky.com/story/amp/what-is-the-age-of-consent-in-the-uk-and-could-it-be-changed-in-wake-of-russell-brand-allegations-12964295

BBC must 'get a grip' after new allegations presenter 'appeared in underwear in video call'

The unnamed star is facing fresh allegations from the family of a youth who was allegedly paid more than £35,000 for sexually explicit images. The presenter was reportedly seen in a state of undress on their sofa at home.

https://news.sky.com/story/bbc-presenter-accused-over-explicit-photos-stripped-to-underpants-during-video-call-with-youth-12917705

OP posts:
whatnet · 02/10/2023 23:05

“PosterBoy · Today 02:54

My motivation?

Bloody hell I was absolutely horny as hell from 14. I used to masturbate about four times a day Wait til 18? Yeah right.

Some of you just don't like sex, imo.”

Some of us just don’t like the thought of predators having sex with kids and ruining their lives 👍 and it is a very gendered issue as young girls are hugely the target for predators.

But as Star points out there are also many young males being abused too

“StarlightLady · Today 08:08

I agree with @Circe 7. Legislation should not be introduced that the CPS are advised in part to ignore, that would cause extreme difficulties for the courts.

ln addition there appears to be an assumption throughout the thread that everyone is heterosexual. There are lots of gay and bi 16 and 17 year olds young men and women out there!”

Thanks for helping me better explain the position from a child’s point of view.

OP posts:
whatnet · 02/10/2023 23:27

More recent arguments
Edit
By the end of 20th century, those in favour of reducing the age of consent faster were pointing to faster physical development and increasing levels of sexual activity among adolescents as reasoning.[26]More generally in academic work, particularly in sociology, writing on human sexual behaviourdebated prohibitions on sexual activity involving children.[14]

Although he does not favour total abolition, Francis Bennion, a British liberal humanist also influenced by the historical context of the issue, emphasised the fact that children are "sexual beings", concluding that this in itself makes legal prohibitions unfair.[27]

Miranda Sawyer, British journalist specialised in music and youth culture, suggested that "we have sexual feelings from a very early age", considering that sex is "natural behaviour". She favoured lowering the age of consent to 12 in the UK while labeling the criminalisation of sexual activity under the age of 16 as "laughably unrealistic".[28]

In November 2013, a leading public health expert and Faculty of Public Health president, Professor John Ashton, called for the age of consent to be lowered to 15. He said that the current legal limit prevented sexually active younger teenagers from getting support with issues of disease and contraception. He said that official figures indicated as many as a third of all 14- and 15-year-olds are having sex in Britain and said that a nationwide debate was needed to discuss the benefits of lowering the present age of consent of 16.[29] The call was rejected by then Prime Minister David Cameron and then Deputy Prime Minister Nick Cleggthat same year.[30]

Criticism
Edit

Evidence from some of the groups who have advocated for lowering the age of consent have included known and convicted paedophiles within some of the organisations, for example the Paedophile Information Exchange.[31]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent_reform_in_the_United_Kingdom

What I cannot understand is why you are so utterly opposed to protecting children. As a mother of young daughters, I have a clear objective. What is yours?

Age of consent reform in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent_reform_in_the_United_Kingdom

OP posts:
TeenLifeMum · 02/10/2023 23:35

I had sex at 17 with a 24 year old man. He wasn’t a predator, I consented and I’m happy I had sex with him. Relationship didn’t last but went on for just over a year. We were in the same friendship group. I felt safe and was in a loving relationship. I’ve also been raped, I was 18 almost 19 and he was 21 I think.

I think making out 16/17 year olds don’t want sex and only have it because evil older men groom them is bullshit.

whatnet · 02/10/2023 23:43

“TeenLifeMum · Today 23:35

I had sex at 17 with a 24 year old man. He wasn’t a predator, I consented and I’m happy I had sex with him. Relationship didn’t last but went on for just over a year. We were in the same friendship group. I felt safe and was in a loving relationship. I’ve also been raped, I was 18 almost 19 and he was 21 I think.

I think making out 16/17 year olds don’t want sex and only have it because evil older men groom them is bullshit.”

So, I would urge you to get counselling. Would you want your child in that situation? If you were raped that is a crime, regardless of age. I find it utterly bonkers that we are even having these conversations. Bonkers. Our poor children.

OP posts:
Mountaineer0009 · 02/10/2023 23:48

it also does not help society when we have some celebs, dating people half their ages.

whatnet · 02/10/2023 23:57

For almost 10 years between 1974 and 1984, an organisation known as the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) operated across the UK. It openly campaigned for the lowering of the age of consent and made concerted efforts to normalise and justify sexual relationships between adults and children.

2. During the late 1970s, PIE was not simply tolerated as part of the authorities’ proper commitment to freedom of speech and freedom of association but was accepted as a legitimate voice of an oppressed sexual minority by respected and well-established civil society organisations such as the National Council for Civil Liberties (NCCL, now known as Liberty) and the Albany Trust (a specialist counselling and psychotherapy charity). It achieved some traction and influence in civil libertarian and gay rights groups generally in that period.
3. Given the awareness now of the extent of child sexual abuse and the damage caused to victims and survivors, it is extraordinary that such an organisation could have attracted support for such a long period of time. In an effort to understand how this could have happened, the Inquiry obtained extensive evidence from the archives of the London School of Economics about the history and activities of PIE and the other civil society organisations it interacted with. We also received a lengthy witness statement and numerous documents from the NCCL and heard oral evidence from one of the current trustees of the Albany Trust.
4. Our investigation has also examined the allegation that PIE may have had sufficient backing within government that it actually received funding or other support from the Home Office, either directly or via the Albany Trust. We heard evidence from Timothy (Tim) Hulbert, the former Home Office Voluntary Services Unit (VSU) consultant who made this allegation, and examined the previous investigation into the matter carried out by Peter Wanless and Richard Whittam QC.
Chronology of main events during the existence of PIE5. PIE was founded in September 1974 by Michael Hanson, a gay student living in Edinburgh, as part of the Scottish Minorities Group (which later became the Scottish Homosexual Rights Group). Its inaugural meeting was held in Edinburgh in March 1975. In July 1975, Keith Hose became its chair and the centre of activity moved to London.[1]
6. Mr Hose gave a speech at the annual conference of the Campaign for Homosexual Equality (CHE) in November 1975, calling for a more sympathetic approach to people with ‘paedophilic tendencies’, which garnered attention from several more well-established organisations.[2] Indeed, the Albany Trust had already made contact with PIE following an earlier speech given by Mr Hose at a conference on the mental health of sexual minorities hosted by Mind, the mental health charity, in September 1975.[3]
7. In around November 1975, PIE composed and submitted a paper to the Home Office Criminal Law Revision Committee, which proposed the abolition of the age of consent and the removal of sexual activity between adults and children from the criminal law.[4]
8. Tom O’Carroll became PIE’s Secretary in early 1976.[5] In April 1976, PIE launched its first magazine, entitled Understanding Paedophilia. This was renamed Magpie in March 1977[6] and numerous editions were published between 1977 and 1983. Magpie was brazen in its promotion of sexual activity with children, with a wide variety of content including photographs or drawings of children in provocative poses, comment pieces, as well as ‘travelogue’ and academic-style articles.[7]
9. In September 1977, PIE held its first public meeting in London, and Mr O’Carroll (who was by then Chair) also attended the British Psychological Society’s conference. This led to significant media attention for the first time.[8]
10. In May 1978, PIE published a booklet entitled Paedophilia Some Questions and Answers,[9] and distributed copies to every MP and peer in Parliament as well as to the media and various prominent civil rights campaigners.[10] The initial work on this pamphlet was carried out in conjunction with the Albany Trust, as discussed below.
11. By July 1979, PIE’s window of acceptance and influence began to draw to a close. Charges of conspiracy to corrupt public morals were brought against five serving or former members of the PIE executive committee (one of whom died before trial). The initial trial in January 1981 collapsed and a retrial took place in March 1981 against three of the defendants (one having been acquitted in the first trial).[11] At the retrial O’Carroll was convicted and sentenced to two years’ imprisonment.[12]
12. PIE continued to exist in a diminished form for two or three years. It made some efforts to appear in public, such as taking part in the London Gay Pride march in 1983. However, in late 1983, there was a further prosecution of members of its new executive committee on charges of distributing ‘child pornography’ and incitement to commit unlawful sexual acts with children. In light of this PIE was shut down by its leadership in July 1984.[13]
PIE’s attempts to lobby parliamentarians and government13. At its height in around 1978, it seems that PIE had some 300 members in total.[14] The Inquiry has seen no evidence to suggest that PIE had any members who were MPs or peers, or who could be described more broadly as senior Westminster figures, with the exception of Sir Peter Hayman. There were two members of the PIE executive committee – Charles Napier and Peter Righton[15] – who had significant establishment connections of a more general kind, such as holding prominent positions in schools and academia or (in Mr Righton’s case) in public advisory roles, but we have seen no evidence of any other prominent persons.
14. Despite this, PIE made some concerted efforts to lobby government and politicians. In addition to the submission to the Criminal Law Revision Committee in 1975 and the distribution of Paedophilia Some Questions and Answers, there appear to have been many other attempts to get favourable political, media and cultural attention for PIE’s views.
15. The evidence we have seen suggests that PIE did not make much impact through these efforts, apart from briefly amongst certain civil libertarian organisations and some gay rights campaigners. For example, in the early 1980s, Edward Heath chaired the Youth Affairs Lobby,[16] a precursor to the Youth Parliament,[17] which members of PIE and supporters of PIE’s ideas tried to lobby. Mr Heath’s private secretary of the time, Peter Batey, recalled informing Mr Heath he had received a letter from PIE and him replying “We don’t want anything to do with them” with a strength of reaction that was notable.[18]
16. We also obtained evidence showing that when he was Home Secretary, in November 1983, Leon Brittan held a meeting with Geoffrey Dickens MP to discuss banning PIE. Although it was decided not to do so, there is no hint of sympathy for PIE in any of the documents. On the contrary, the discussion is about the need to be seen to act following an attack on a boy in Brighton, but also about the legal difficulties in banning PIE and whether it was necessary given that by 1983 its influence had largely disappeared as a result of the criminal prosecutions.[19]
View all references on this page

OP posts:
whatnet · 02/10/2023 23:59

Paedophile Information Exchange
Article Talk
Language
Watch
Edit
The Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) was a British pro-paedophile activist group, founded in October 1974 and officially disbanded in 1984.[2]The group campaigned for the abolition of the age of consent. It was described by the BBC in 2007 as "an international organisation of people who trade obscene material".[3]

Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE)

PIE logo 1974–1984
Formation
1974
Dissolved
1984
Type
Disbanded
Purpose
Pro-paedophile advocacy
Age of consent reform[1]
Headquarters
London
Location
United Kingdom
Key people
Ian Dunn
Tom O'Carroll
Although it had a few women paedophiles as members, the organisation's membership was mainly young, professional-educated male paedophiles, including youth and care workers. Its membership in 1977 was around 250, mainly focused in London and the South East;[4] the same number for membership was also reported in 1981.[5]

Early history and activity

Public protests and reactions

Legal action against members

Government funding

Affiliation to the NCCL

Allegations against senior politicians

Groups supporting PIE

See also

Notes and references

From Where Wikipedia. Do some research. Stop being sheep. We see you and we hear you.

Paedophile Information Exchange - Wikipedia

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paedophile_Information_Exchange

OP posts:
Poptones · 03/10/2023 06:37

whatnet · 02/10/2023 23:43

“TeenLifeMum · Today 23:35

I had sex at 17 with a 24 year old man. He wasn’t a predator, I consented and I’m happy I had sex with him. Relationship didn’t last but went on for just over a year. We were in the same friendship group. I felt safe and was in a loving relationship. I’ve also been raped, I was 18 almost 19 and he was 21 I think.

I think making out 16/17 year olds don’t want sex and only have it because evil older men groom them is bullshit.”

So, I would urge you to get counselling. Would you want your child in that situation? If you were raped that is a crime, regardless of age. I find it utterly bonkers that we are even having these conversations. Bonkers. Our poor children.

Wtf?!

Are you unable to read what the poster said? She wasn't a child when the rape occurred, she was 18 going on 19 and the guy 21. If the sexual interaction (sorry but I can't think of a way of phrasing it better) HAD been consensual it would have been perfectly OK within your framework.

EVERYTHING about her post tells you are talking bullshit.

And why are you conflating age of consent with rape?

BIossomtoes · 03/10/2023 07:29

Why are you encouraging OP?

ehupo7 · 03/10/2023 09:13

This thread is ridiculous, why is there post after post of copied and pasted wiki pages. Pointless.

StarlightLady · 03/10/2023 09:27

OP, you are misquoting me! I did not say “there are many males being abused too”. I was merely pointing out, as a 40 something bisexual woman, that not everybody is heterosexual. ‘Seems obvious, but it’s often overlooked.

Same sex marriages exist. The age of consent is rightly 16 in my view and some of the suggestions here are akin to closing down supermarkets to prevent shoplifting. It’s a case of balance.

Older teens (16+) have a right not to be abused, but they also have a right to a passionate, fulfilling and passionate sex life with whom they choose.

.

Beautiful3 · 03/10/2023 10:19

16 year olds are legally allowed to get married, so it wouldn't make sense to increase the age of consent.

ArseInTheCoOpWindow · 03/10/2023 10:34

Beautiful3 · 03/10/2023 10:19

16 year olds are legally allowed to get married, so it wouldn't make sense to increase the age of consent.

Not in the U.K. any more.

Sugarfree23 · 03/10/2023 10:40

ArseInTheCoOpWindow · 03/10/2023 10:34

Not in the U.K. any more.

You may speak for parts of the United Kingdom not all of it.

ArseInTheCoOpWindow · 03/10/2023 10:44

I meant to say England. They aren’t legally allowed to get married at 16 anymore.

TeenLifeMum · 04/10/2023 14:14

whatnet · 02/10/2023 23:43

“TeenLifeMum · Today 23:35

I had sex at 17 with a 24 year old man. He wasn’t a predator, I consented and I’m happy I had sex with him. Relationship didn’t last but went on for just over a year. We were in the same friendship group. I felt safe and was in a loving relationship. I’ve also been raped, I was 18 almost 19 and he was 21 I think.

I think making out 16/17 year olds don’t want sex and only have it because evil older men groom them is bullshit.”

So, I would urge you to get counselling. Would you want your child in that situation? If you were raped that is a crime, regardless of age. I find it utterly bonkers that we are even having these conversations. Bonkers. Our poor children.

Being raped at 19 was totally non related to being in a sexual relationship at 17.

would I be okay with dd having sex age 17 in a loving, consensual, safe relationship? Yes.

would I be okay with my dd being raped? Obviously no!

I’m fully aware being raped is a crime and it took me a long time to accept it. But that bears no connection to when I lost my virginity.

whatnet · 04/10/2023 18:52

It is hugely concerning, when trying to figure out, how we better protect our children, there is such vitriol, it doesn’t seem to make sense. There are many stories and anecdotes about grown adults on this thread, and their own sex lives, and experiences. Times have changed. We have better awareness. The Patriarchal system might still prevail in the UK, but times are changing and we need to keep pushing forward. You are not our concern, the children are.

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread