Do you agree with the current age of consent? Somewhere between 16-18, sometimes 14. or even younger

Do you agree with the current age of consent? Somewhere between 16-18, sometimes 14. or even younger.
What's your ideal age of consent?
What should determine the right age for sex?

14-15 is probably right

18 with romeo and juliet laws is just fine to me.

Age of consent, just as with any age threshold, shouldn't exist at all. This doesn't mean I think sexual relationships between preteens and 40yo men should become the norm, so don't even try to attack me on that. But to think that everyone becomes mature enough for X stuff at exactly the same age is stupid. And no, it's not really pragmatism. Testing who is and who isn't able to do X is pretty easy.

Well, I knew I liked boys by the time I turned 4, sex by the age of 7, and had developed several hardcore fetishes by 10.

Somewhere in the 7-10 range I'd say.

I would increase it to 25, tbh

y?

For whatever reason would you propose such horror?

mid puberty I guess

I think most people are ready for sex at 15

because free access to sex among the youth diminishes their lust for revolution

tbh there are 14 year olds that I would smash. makes things easier.

Accelerationism will only make them hate you

There shouldn't be any.

No age limits, I want my mail order child bride fresh from the womb

good, they should direct that anger and sexual frustration toward violent revolution

Seeing as this is the first post-election thread on this topic and there are a lot of newfags here, I'm going to give you a quick preview of how this is going to go.

I don't know man

Laws are spooky but kids also can't reasonably consent

"Ready for sex at 15" is the purpose of Romeo and Juliet laws. Not making it the full on age of consent at 15 is while they might be mature enough for sex they're probably not mature enough to not be easily pressured by older people.

Sex in any function it serves is a form of oppression. I speak not of androgeny or hermaphroditism. I mean full asexuality. I propose any element of the left or right wing having any persuasion in favor of any kind of sexuality be purged.

May the machine rise.

prob 14. But a 14 year old should only really be fucking people up to the age of maybe 17/18. After 16 the top age limit move to 20 and then after 18 no limit at all.

Yeh its arbitrary and spooky but I also think courts should be completely different that obviously if a 15 year old and 19 year old are clearly in a loving relationship then the 19 year old doesn't get fucked over. Similarly 17-22 year old or whatever.

Ideally there would be no strict age limit and the community would only intervene when it felt there was abuse.

People under the age of 12 are not old enough to be fucking at all period. A suppose 13 and 14 year olds can experiment with each other.

Its a load of grey areas tbh

Old enough to bleed; old enough to breed. Make it about biology, not the empty concept of consent.

A lesbian I know said she knew she liked girls at the age of 4. I wonder what happens at that age that you know you like opposite or same sex?

/thread

What about boys? They don't PMS. Would have to consistently jerk them off to see if they yet produce some kind of liquid from their genitals.

Everyone knows age of consent laws only apply to girls.

I should have guessed as much.

Depends on how you define kids, doesn't it?

I don't see many grey areas here. It's actually pretty black and white for the most part. If they've been through sex ed and are biologically ready, they can consent, just like if they've been through driver's ed they can drive a car. All this stuff about being pressured by someone older could apply in any other form of relationship through any number of avenues, like one person having more money than the other, and it's actually much worse in that situation. Society is supposed to make up the difference (if there even is one, and in most cases the difference is so small as to be not worth discussing), not restrict people's freedom of association based on the same kind of moral crusade mentality that brought us the drug warriors.

16 years old girls are pretty hot fam

age/2+7

...

8

To be honest, people are able to think for themselves by the time they're 5, and are already thinking sexual thoughts around that time as well. If you're able to make the conscious decision to go to school, you're able to make the conscious decision on whether or not you want sex.

School is not obligatory until the age of 8 in your country?

I was giving 8 as a more conservative answer, to appeal to the prudes. I would honestly put it at 5, but that's just my opinion.

I didn't get it from them. Didnt even know they made a "comic" about it.

...

I'd say it's fine in the 16-18 range, any younger than that and you start getting into really nasty coercive shit with older people. If it's two kids playing around sexually who gives a fuck, the kids who are getting on the sex offender list because one of their friends sent them nudes is horrible.

You didn't answer my question.

18 seems ideal from my perspective. There are close in age exemption laws like the one in my state so that if you're in your early twenties you can sleep with 16 and 17 year olds without it being considered statutory rape legally. And at that age parents could still keep their teens away from truly coercive/predatory people so I'm fine with this.

I pulled out 8 as an arbitrary number to appeal to prudish types, but no, school does not start at 8. At most, all that should be required is basic sex education, and there's really no reason why that sort of thing should wait.

Do you think 5/8 old children make the conscious 'decision' to go to school? How many children do you have in your social circle? Have you ever had a little brother/sister?

I'd say 30

Did you idiots even read the fucking thread? This was debunked. Here, let me point it out for you.

I guess it just goes to show that ephebophobia isn't based on any kind of rational thought process, much like any other kind of bigotry. It's pretty much a cult. No matter how many times they get their arguments destroyed, most of them will never see reason. They'll push the goalposts back as far as they have to in order to keep trying to justify taking people's rights away. It's goddamn infuriating and those of us who actually understand this subject have had more than enough of this shit, especially from the "left". Why the fuck should you people get to tell anyone else what they can and can't do with their own bodies? Do you want to tell someone else what substances or media they can consume, too? The fuck is wrong with you? This shit is not acceptable and you need to learn that sooner rather than later.

Protip: Your body is not a means of production and as such it is not meant to be collectively managed.

I guess can add

to the list.

No age limits. Young people are sentient beings just like the rest of us (except moralfaggots, moralfaggots are not sentient).

Why don't you consult medical experts and doctors which age should be acceptable for having sex, and how sex should not be main drive of your culture or political progress?

After all look at all those girls that constantly live not by their own resources, but by money they never earn, and buy all the consumable shit they can just to look more "fashionable" and appeal to handsome men, to have sex with them and live by desires, not ideology or any kind of rules. Sex sells, it creates consumerism drive. Society that doesn't constantly think of sex would think and work better. The younger they get into it, the longer they live like that.

As far as a medical doctor would be concerned, puberty is old enough. Medicine doesn't deal with social structures or any other such things, but even for the disciplines that do, natural human desires must be accommodated insofar as they don't step on anyone else's rights.

Why not?

Zizek would approve.

You must be new here if you think socialists are interested in having to work. Full automation is on the way, but even if it wasn't that's no reason to rob people of their fun.

rare prickly

Yeah but I mean I don't know, that seems slightly puritanical to me. I don't know if a 15 year old with a 25 year old is strictly always a bad thing. Maybe it is but, the 18 limit seems pretty arbitrary.

A lot of sick fucks with no concern for child safety in this thread.

spooky

It is arbitrary but it's better than not having a limit at all. Just like laws prohibiting sale of alcohol and tobacco to minors and age requirements for driver's licenses. Some places have more nuanced laws so teens can fuck each other but not adults.

How do you mean? Depending on what you're advocating for, this could easily be interpreted as "telling them that their own desires are automatically harmful if they decide they like someone older despite there being absolutely no evidence to prove that". The individual's right to control their own body must be the foremost concern in any treatment of sexual consent. Obviously no one should be forced to do anything sexual, but certain groups (read: ugly feminists mad jelly of younger, hotter girls) have dramatically expanded the definition of coercion to include things it should never have included.

I think it needs to be explained that sexual desire is okay, but giving into sexual requests that aren't based on your own lusty thoughts is bad.