Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Altai

Having sex with 13 years olds

Recommended Posts

France government is going to legalise having sex with 13 years old as long as the kid also wants it. Details are written in the link below.



What do you think about it ? :lol: I am sure you have some "logical" explanations for such a democratic decision of your relatives -_- 


https://www.lexpress.fr/actualite/societe/justice/consentement-sexuel-le-gouvernement-envisage-de-fixer-l-age-minimum-a-13-ans_1960179.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bet Alabama Senate Candidate Roy Moore wishes he lived in France. 

Also nice of you two cite an article written in French. After using Google Translate, it says this just a debate happening. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no desire to have sex with minors, but if I was 13 again and wanted to have sex with an adult, why should the government interfere.  I think I knew at 13 if I wanted sex with someone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-11-17 at 1:03 AM, H10 said:

I have no desire to have sex with minors, but if I was 13 again and wanted to have sex with an adult, why should the government interfere.  I think I knew at 13 if I wanted sex with someone.

That’s really disgusting.  You’re a weirdo. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/11/2017 at 4:03 AM, H10 said:

I have no desire to have sex with minors, but if I was 13 again and wanted to have sex with an adult, why should the government interfere.  I think I knew at 13 if I wanted sex with someone.

Same reason they would "interfere" if you were 6 years old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/15/2017 at 9:04 AM, Altai said:

France government is going to legalise having sex with 13 years old as long as the kid also wants it. Details are written in the link below.



What do you think about it ? :lol: I am sure you have some "logical" explanations for such a democratic decision of your relatives -_- 


https://www.lexpress.fr/actualite/societe/justice/consentement-sexuel-le-gouvernement-envisage-de-fixer-l-age-minimum-a-13-ans_1960179.html

Catering to the creeping in of Islamic sharia law and their sick and pathetic ways of doing things. Otherwise what other reason can there be for it?  I am pretty sure that the french people were not pushing for that kind of sexual perversion.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wtf ? Why this topic is not popular ? I thought you guys were quite interested to talk about these things by scattering salivas around from your mouth. Hmmm I think the reason is its not a news from an Eastern country -_- ohh that hypocrisy, its really soo ugly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Altai said:

Wtf ? Why this topic is not popular ? I thought you guys were quite interested to talk about these things by scattering salivas around from your mouth. Hmmm I think the reason is its not a news from an Eastern country -_- ohh that hypocrisy, its really soo ugly.

The topic is one of those in the "grey" region, meaning it's not clear, black and white issue. Some people are more mature than others. It wasn't that long ago age 14 was ok in Canada-

Canada's age of consent raised by 2 years

May 01, 2008
The 'Tackling Violent Crime Act' raises the legal age of sexual consent in Canada to 16 from 14, the first time it has been raised since 1892.

Perhaps outraged leftists can relax knowing this, it's part of our history. Your mama was doing it at an earlier age than you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/18/2017 at 2:21 PM, OftenWrong said:

Same reason they would "interfere" if you were 6 years old.

At 6, I didn't even know what my penis was for.  13 I knew what was up sexually, and most 13 year olds do.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, H10 said:

At 6, I didn't even know what my penis was for.  13 I knew what was up sexually, and most 13 year olds do.

They might know "what was up" sexually, but they don't have the ability to make responsible judgements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/20/2017 at 6:41 PM, OftenWrong said:

They might know "what was up" sexually, but they don't have the ability to make responsible judgements.

Indeed, just ask the teenagers that Moore preyed upon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

France has a problem with no current age of consent laws, so they need to address the situation. This was a hot topic because a current case will be going to trial early next year involving an 11 year old girl and a 28 year old man (there was also another recent case where the respective ages were 22 & 11 that ended in an acquittal) . The article referenced above suggests that one group is advocating for 13 while parliamentarians are advocating for 15. I don't think a simple age is answer, the disparity between the partners involved should be taken into account. It is naive to think that there are no young people (say 13 or 14) experimenting with sex, but I see a big difference between that and a mature adult and a young child. Also note that sex partners do not ask for proof of age, so if a 13 year old claims to be 15 we need to factor in that in; it would be very different if a 16 year old had sex with 13 year old that looked and claimed to be 15, and if a 39 year old did the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/18/2017 at 1:02 PM, Altai said:

Wtf ? Why this topic is not popular ? I thought you guys were quite interested to talk about these things by scattering salivas around from your mouth. Hmmm I think the reason is its not a news from an Eastern country -_- ohh that hypocrisy, its really soo ugly.

I am of the opinion that the majority of Canadians really don't care that much about anything going on in Canada except what affects them and their money. Eventually, I see the liberals allowing sex with 13 year old kids, or as others would call it pedophilia, made legal in Canada. Canada and Canadians appear to have lost all their morals and values and will see and have no problem with older men having sex with children. It will be coated with sugar by our politicians and the liberal media to make it appear as though it is ok and is a normal thing for some people to want to do. Judging by Canadians who voted in Trudeau and his merry band of liberals tells us that they have not got a clue all that much about anything. But hey. 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, taxme said:

Eventually, I see the liberals allowing sex with 13 year old kids, or as others would call it pedophilia, made legal in Canada.

Are you sure you are not thinking of Alabama?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, ?Impact said:

Are you sure you are not thinking of Alabama?

I was thinking about Islam and Muslims, and I am pretty sure that the trudeau/liberals will try and find someway of making it legal for grownup perverts to have sex with 13 year old children. 

Edited by taxme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/26/2017 at 10:40 AM, WestCoastRunner said:

Indeed, just ask the teenagers that Moore preyed upon. 

Then bring then forward? Where are they all? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/11/2017 at 11:04 AM, Altai said:

France government is going to legalise having sex with 13 years old as long as the kid also wants it. Details are written in the link below.



What do you think about it ? :lol: I am sure you have some "logical" explanations for such a democratic decision of your relatives -_- 


https://www.lexpress.fr/actualite/societe/justice/consentement-sexuel-le-gouvernement-envisage-de-fixer-l-age-minimum-a-13-ans_1960179.html

Canada only relatively recently made 16 years of age the 'age of consent'. It was 14 before a few years ago now. 

Personally, I think ages are not the appropriate means to determine limitations. They are just politically expedient. I find it odd to watch Dr Phil repeat to a guest of 18 who sleeps with one under 17 as being unusually stupid not to recognize that the 'law' makes them a "criminal"?? The presumption is that the 'law' somehow is one passed down by nature (or God, with respect to most) as though these laws were already agreed to as ESSENTIAL by the perpetrators as much as the air they breathe. 

It would be best to find a means to measure maturity and conditional circumstances. The letter-of-the-law tends to get transferred into people's heads as laws of nature  too easily.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Scott Mayers said:

Canada only relatively recently made 16 years of age the 'age of consent'. It was 14 before a few years ago now. 

Personally, I think ages are not the appropriate means to determine limitations. They are just politically expedient. I find it odd to watch Dr Phil repeat to a guest of 18 who sleeps with one under 17 as being unusually stupid not to recognize that the 'law' makes them a "criminal"?? The presumption is that the 'law' somehow is one passed down by nature (or God, with respect to most) as though these laws were already agreed to as ESSENTIAL by the perpetrators as much as the air they breathe. 

It would be best to find a means to measure maturity and conditional circumstances. The letter-of-the-law tends to get transferred into people's heads as laws of nature  too easily.

Criminal law is about regulating social behaviour. It can't flex to suit  individual circumstances. If it did then then each decision would be accused of being inconsistent and unfair. Remember this is criminal law not private civil law. In private civil law, Judges can consider individual circumstances when determining damages and behaviour.

That said, it was in June of 2006 when the age of consent went from 14 to 16 but its not that simple because depending on whether the person engaging in sex is of the older age but is in a relationship of trust, authority or dependency, that 16 year mark is not absolute.

So to  be clear whole a person must be at least 16 years old to be able to legally agree to sexual activity its not an absolute.

As well someone 14-15 is allowed to consent to sex provided the partner is no more than 5 years older.

As well 12-13 years can consent to sex provided the person is less than two years older.

In both the above mentioned situations there can be no relationship of trust, authority, dependency of exploitation.

Sexual exploitation is the legal term now used where you  would otherwise have the legal right to have sex but your position of trust or authority makes it illegal, i.e., you are a foster parent, teacher, coach, clergy, business manager, someone the child is financially dependent on.

The laws above have nothing to do with God. If they did  then Christians would point out Joseph was far older than Mary as some did in defense of Moore. Traditional Christianity, Judaism and today's mainstream Islam and many societies say one a girl men engages in menstration she is capable of sex and birthing children.

Rules of sex in the past may have been justified by religions but were based on the primal function of reproduction. Any female capable of  having her cycle was considered sexually acceptable.

The concept of being a pedophile or a hebephile or engaging in sexual assault and exploitation has evolved and its a mix of the moral standards of the day and changing psychiatric definitions of sexual disorders that reflect the morality of the day at times.

Criminal law is very much a reflective mirror of the moral standards of the day. At one point it defined sodomy as a criminal offence and said a prostitute.female sex worker could not be able to plead she was sexually assaulted given her profession.

The fact is we have an entire marketing and entertainment industry that  sexualizes children and uses sex to sell movies and products and portrays sexuality in provocative ways.

Western social standards as to sexuality have widely fluctuated. In the 1960's the pendelum swung to wide open sex with indiscriminate partners and a confused female identity trying to balance being treated equally with their desire to choose not committed sex just like men. Gays and women came out so to speak as part of a general civil rebellion by blacks in the US and then all kinds of other minority groups to unfair treatment by the law.

One man's LSD trip sexual encounter in a crowd with a woman at Woodstock also under the influence would not have raised an eyebrow and didn't as people openly had sex at Woodstock rolling in the mud.

We went top cocaine fueled sex orgies and the Playboy mansion, Penthouse and Screw Magazine defending liberalism and sexual use of women as masterbatory objects at the same time.

Gloria Steinhem had no problem providing an editorial to Playboy.  You read back now the sexual standards of the 60's and 70's you can see there was a great deal of identity confusion brought on by wide spread use of drugs and the concept being promiscuous was part of the hip lifestyle.

Now we see the pendelum swinging to an extreme reaction to it.

Its posed as me too reactions to men being depicted and exposed as having harassed sexuality which may or may not entail actual sexual penetration by fornification once called rape. Rape was defined as penetration. Now its any act of unconsented sexual behaviour including technically touching, groping, kissing.

So as we speak we have a litany of me too stories coming out and people being fired. 

All that said age has to  be a reference. There's very few objective criteria one can use as markers to define sexual behaviour. Its one of the few.

Your comment, " It would be best to find a means to measure maturity and conditional circumstances " is easy to say but try come up with a law to protect non consenting people without age as a measuring and conditional circumstance. I would suggest to you it would be impossible.

I would also suggest to you there is no absolute way to measure maturity. Maturity is inherently an approximation point that varies in each individual. It could refer to physical characteristics, emotional ones, cognitive processing skills.

You can have someone who is incredibly intelligent but has the maturity or physicality of a very young person making them easy to exploit. You have very emotionally aged abused children whose bodies are physically damaged.

I've worked in the legal system with sexually abused children, geriatrics, women, disabled, and men. They come in all ages, ethnicities, sexual preferences and behaviours. Consenting sex between adults of equal values and power is no concern.

Where it gets problematic is any relationship where there is violence or a marked imbalance in power is triggering an abusive relationship(s).

The law does not have the ability or luxury to be vague and have some wide open definition that will never lead to consistent regulation. It has to define limits and age is as I said one of the few ways to do it.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree for the most part. I only assert that it is "not appropriate" as a means to actually determine one's guilt of sexual (and mischievous) behavior between different aged people. The older person could be relatively novel and naive to sex and/or social interactions. Present law is "an expedient". 

I disagree that we cannot be more flexible in creating laws based on maturity at some point in the future. "Motive" in law is a 'rational process' with regards to a system that we require to determine if one is or is not reasonably doubtful of some charge. But in many cases, motive (intent, maturity, etc) is treated irrelevant when it comes to sexual taboos to an extreme unwarranted degree. Age limit is too simplified for such a serious charge regarding sex when these types of crimes are often treated worse than murder itself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29/11/2017 at 9:57 PM, taxme said:

sex with 13 year old kids

Do you mean 'kids who are 13', as opposed to 'young adults who are 13'? Or are you labelling all 13-year-olds as kids?

On 29/11/2017 at 9:57 PM, taxme said:

or as others would call it pedophilia

Yes, many people would call it paedophilia, but they probably wouldn't be right.

On 30/11/2017 at 9:14 PM, taxme said:

for grownup perverts to have sex with 13 year old children.

Do you mean 'grownups who are perverts', as opposed to 'grownups who are not perverts'? Or are you labelling all grownups who have sex with 13-year-olds as perverts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Antares said:

Do you mean 'kids who are 13', as opposed to 'young adults who are 13'? Or are you labelling all 13-year-olds as kids?

Yes, many people would call it paedophilia, but they probably wouldn't be right.

Do you mean 'grownups who are perverts', as opposed to 'grownups who are not perverts'? Or are you labelling all grownups who have sex with 13-year-olds as perverts?

If one is 13 then they are all still kids at heart. 

If one has sex with a 13 year old than they are a pedophile or a rapist. 13 year olds are not quit into sex at that age. Were you? 

Indeed I am. Grownups should be having sex with grownups, not kids. Are you one of those perverts who has had sex with a 13 year old? Just asking. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/15/2018 at 2:54 PM, taxme said:

13 year olds are not quit into sex at that age. Were you?

When I was 13 (early 70's), sex was indeed on the mind of my peer group. We talked about it all the time, bragged a lot, and certainly were not the angels our mothers thought we were. While sexual intercourse was still a few years away, we certainly spent time with girls out behind the bleachers (so to say) doing things that would make our Sunday school teacher blush. The important point however it was among peers, not significantly older kids, and certainly not adults. Humans are sexual creatures, and the age of puberty is driven by biology. Kids are vulnerable at that time because adults have the experience and can easily take advantage of the changes they are experiencing. That is why we need to look not at the age of an individual, but the disparity between different ones. Certainly we want to educate our children to protect them from the complications of becoming sexually active (disease, pregnancy, etc.), and to prepare them to have the confidence to say no to anything they are not comfortable with and make them aware of how bad people may try to take advantage of them. What we don't want to do however is punish them for being human.

Given recent events, we can even encourage our daughters to hold onto their virginity until 18 and then they may become millionaires.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/01/2018 at 8:54 PM, taxme said:

If one is 13 then they are all still kids at heart.

This is a culture-dependent claim. In modern advanced societies we are keeping our offspring childish for longer than in historical or less-developed ones. I take it that by 'kid' you mean 'child' in the cultural sense, rather than in the biological sense, since most 13-year-olds are sexually mature (in the sense of biologically fertile). We advanced moderns have the luxury of being able to distinguish between these two senses, and I'm afraid people sometimes exploit that by glossing over the distinction.

On 15/01/2018 at 8:54 PM, taxme said:

If one has sex with a 13 year old than they are a pedophile or a rapist.

Some 13-year-olds are childish; others are not. I don't think it's useful to use the same label for adults who have sex with them irrespective of their individual level of maturity. Your reference to rape seems to imply that 13-year-olds are incapable of giving consent, which I would disagree with.

On 15/01/2018 at 8:54 PM, taxme said:

Are you one of those perverts who has had sex with a 13 year old?

No, but what would you say if someone claimed to be a non-pervert who'd had sex with a 13-year-old? My guess is that your concept of perversion is, as above, culture-specific: perversion is behaviour that is regarded as unacceptable by most people in your culture. But in the culture of, say, Anglo-Saxon England (which was one of the most advanced of its time in the world), it was perfectly normal for 13-year-old women (which is how they were regarded) to be married and pregnant. Indeed, in prehistoric times it was absolutely necessary for people to be procreating by that age. That's because life expectancy was too low for people to wait any longer if they wanted to raise their kids to adulthood before they died. And we haven't had time since then to evolve significantly different sexual natures, so having sex with the average 13-year-old is certainly not a perversion of nature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...