Another Waco?

[Cail]

You're just desperate to belong to any group.

But seriously, what age do ya think?

[Avatar]

Ha, like Groucho, I wouldn't want to be in any group that wanted me.

Me personally? I'm good with 16. Less if the other partner is of similar (like nearly exact) age. Say 14, if the BF is 14 1/2. Just to get rid of that statutory rape. Rape is rape, no matter how old you are.

But otherwise, 16 seems a good middle ground. If you're old enough to act like an adult, you're old enough to accept the consequences too. Of course, I also think that you should be 18 to drive. And drink. And vote.

--A

[Cail]

Me personally? I'm good with 16. Less if the other partner is of similar (like nearly exact) age. Say 14, if the BF is 14 1/2. Just to get rid of that statutory rape. Rape is rape, no matter how old you are.

But otherwise, 16 seems a good middle ground. If you're old enough to act like an adult, you're old enough to accept the consequences too. Of course, I also think that you should be 18 to drive. And drink. And vote.

Yeah, that sounds pretty good to me.

[emotional leper]

Libero-fascist?

The older I get, the more I'm convinced that no one under the age of 25 should be able to make any decisions.

But I'm willing to entertain this, because I sort of agree with it. First of all, just about every state in the union has an age of consent of 16. So at what age do you think a person can consent to sex EL?

Well, the Trobrianders seem to get along just fine, so why don't we just let them experiment with people in their own age group, and when they get old enough to actually reproduce, they can start chosing their own partners?

[Cail]

How about an actual answer? Can a 12 year old consent to sex? A 14 year old?

[A Gunslinger]

It's a sticky situation, fersher. And while I think that there ARE unfortunately kids out there who for whatever terrible reason just might be sophisitcated enough to make such choices well before 16... the fact IS that a vast majority are not. Most of the ones who might be are also very liekly to be wounded in some sad way.

No...in the end, it is far better to set an age that the state in question sets after study and debate, and enforce it accordingly.

[duchess of malfi]

Well, the Trobrianders seem to get along just fine, so why don't we just let them experiment with people in their own age group, and when they get old enough to actually reproduce, they can start chosing their own partners?

1. we're not talking about Tobrianders.

We are talking about 21'st century US citizens

and they are not being allowed to experiment with people of their own age - they are being raped by people old enough (easily old enough in many cases) to be their grandparents - and also being subject to all sorts of physical abuse (beatings and the like) when they object

2. and in pretty much every part of the US the following things are illegal
* rape
* child molestation
* physical abuse of children
* welfare fraud
* sexual slavery
* holding people captive

and that is what is being done to these girls by the people who are hiding behind religious rights

[jwaneeta]

they are not being allowed to experiment with people of their own age - they are being raped by people old enough (easily old enough in many cases) to be their grandparents - and also being subject to all sorts of physical abuse (beatings and the like) when they object

2. and in pretty much every part of the US the following things are illegal
* rape
* child molestation
* physical abuse of children
* welfare fraud
* sexual slavery
* holding people captive

and that is what is being done to these girls by the people who are hiding behind religious rights

Right. These girls haven't had the option of consent. That's the point. It's slavery -- they're sexual chattel for the elders of the cult.

[Wyldewode]

Well, the Trobrianders seem to get along just fine, so why don't we just let them experiment with people in their own age group, and when they get old enough to actually reproduce, they can start chosing their own partners?

1. we're not talking about Tobrianders.

We are talking about 21'st century US citizens

Agreed. We need to be comparing the same things. So, for curiosity's sake, what age does EL think the age of consent should be here in the US?

[Cail]

We're still waiting on that....

[Avatar]

Well, while we wait, on topic:

Link

ELDORADO, Texas (CNN) -- The 16-year-old girl whose phone calls led to a raid on a polygamist compound in Texas identified Dale Evans Barlow as the man who she said beat, choked and sexually assaulted her after their "spiritual marriage," according to a court document unsealed Wednesday.

Looks pretty non-consensual to me.

--A

[Cail]

I dunno, I usually pay extra to be choked and beaten.....

[Avatar]

Where's Jenn...

--A

[emotional leper]

You're all missing the point.

[Cail]

You have neither made a point nor answered the question.

[Wyldewode]

Actually, I'm not certain what you are trying to say. Could you elaborate so I can see what point I am missing?

[emotional leper]

There are two problems.

First of all, we're arguing about the ability of minors to consent when they cannot consent period.

Secondly, we're talking about what works in terms of sex.

The Trobrianders have a system under which children experiment with people in their own age group and/or gender until they are old enough to actually have sex, and then they keep on experimenting.

They get along very well. In fact, among many sexually permissive societies (which the United States is considerd to not be), there were very few problems with such things, and very little unhappiness, until Western ideas and ideals were introduced. The eskimos are an example.

The other problem is that this is not a problem with sexuality -- it's a problem with monotheism.

[Wyldewode]

There are two problems.

First of all, we're arguing about the ability of minors to consent when they cannot consent period.

So, are you saying that due to our laws, minors cannot give consent, so it is a moot point?

Secondly, we're talking about what works in terms of sex.

The Trobrianders have a system under which children experiment with people in their own age group and/or gender until they are old enough to actually have sex, and then they keep on experimenting.

They get along very well. In fact, among many sexually permissive societies (which the United States is considerd to not be), there were very few problems with such things, and very little unhappiness, until Western ideas and ideals were introduced. The eskimos are an example.

I'm not arguing with you about this. What I am trying to point out that this is not the way things work in this particular society at this time. Are you saying that the US should change its customs/more/what-have-you to be more like this? And do you think that having this system in place would relate to this situation? How?

The other problem is that this is not a problem with sexuality -- it's a problem with monotheism.

I have to disagree on this. I think this is more a matter of power, and the abuse of it. The matter of religion merely muddies the waters. And no one is arguing that it is about sex. . . not that I read anyway.

Thank you for clarifying, by the way.

[Cail]

The fact that minors can't consent is a social construct. There's no hard-and-fast biological reason they can't consent, it's that our society (and our laws) don't acknowledge their consent until an arbitrary (and non-standard) age is reached.

Monotheism is a red herring. There have been pederasts in every society throughout history.

[emotional leper]

There are two problems.

First of all, we're arguing about the ability of minors to consent when they cannot consent period.

So, are you saying that due to our laws, minors cannot give consent, so it is a moot point?

Something like that.

Secondly, we're talking about what works in terms of sex.

The Trobrianders have a system under which children experiment with people in their own age group and/or gender until they are old enough to actually have sex, and then they keep on experimenting.

They get along very well. In fact, among many sexually permissive societies (which the United States is considerd to not be), there were very few problems with such things, and very little unhappiness, until Western ideas and ideals were introduced. The eskimos are an example.

I'm not arguing with you about this. What I am trying to point out that this is not the way things work in this particular society at this time. Are you saying that the US should change its customs/more/what-have-you to be more like this? And do you think that having this system in place would relate to this situation? How?

Well, ~Lyr, things in our particular society don't seem to be working at all. In case you haven't noticed, our marriages have gone from Monogamy to Serial Monogamy and Polygamy -- not the cultural ideals.

The fact is, the way we do things doesn't work. It's a false ideal, based on religion. That alone should be reason enough to strike it down. And before someone gets all upity about wanting to allow more forms of marriage than monogamy, let me quote you the following statistics, taken from lecture notes in a Cultural Anthropolgy course I have taken (These are the same notes from a Lecture that read Marriage is a cultural universal, which are underlined, because that's an important thing to remember.):

Extramerital Sex:
In about 70% of societies, men have it.
In about 57% of societies, women have it.

Monogamy is the most common, but not most prefered form of marriage.
Mongamy is the ideal and prefered form of marriage in 81 of 400 surveyed cultures. (About 20%)

Polygamy --

• Polygyny, having multiples wives, is prefered in 70% of the World's Cultures. I will get into reasons if asked.
  Polyandry, having multiple husbands, is practised in only 3 cultures in the world.

Group Marriage
Group Marriage is legally recognised in only one country in the world, among the Kaingang of Brasil. 8% of the population practises it.

The other problem is that this is not a problem with sexuality -- it's a problem with monotheism.

I have to disagree on this. I think this is more a matter of power, and the abuse of it. The matter of religion merely muddies the waters. And no one is arguing that it is about sex. . . not that I read anyway.

Thank you for clarifying, by the way.

Oh, it's quite a problem with Monotheism. Under Monotheism, there is only one true God, and his commandments are the only true commandments, and disobeying those commandments carries bad penatlies. And the representatives of the One True God must be obeyed, period. So when your Godly Representative says it's God's Will you Marry Person X, you don't have a choice.