The reasoning behind the age of consent

[Dekusta]

I just finished watching "The Imitation Game". Immediatly after, I did some research on Alan Turing's life and about this 19 year old he had sex with.
That's when I came across this article by an Antifeminist blog:

http://www.returnofkings.com/26006/...t-another-attack-against-male-heterosexuality

Feminism debate aside, here's the interesting quote:
"Homosexuality was decriminalized in 1967 but with a higher age of consent (21) than for heterosexuals. It was then lowered to 18 in 1994 and finally ‘equalized’ in the year 2000. Does an unequal age of consent discriminate against homosexuals? First of all, as we know that the legal system effectively treats the age of consent as applying only to male ‘predators’, then we should not see an unequal age of consent as being between homosexuals and heterosexuals, but rather as applying different ages for boys and girls. And this inequality does have the rationality of recognizing the established truth that teenage boys develop significantly slower towards their physical, sexual, and psychological maturity than do teenage girls. Unequal treatment based upon sex or ‘sexual orientation’ is not discriminatory if it discriminates upon the basis of a relevant difference. As emotional and sexual maturity is the primary justification for the age of consent in the first place, the scientific fact that boys reach maturity later than girls means that, actually, an equal age of consent discriminates against heterosexuals.

We should also note the ‘imbalance in power’ that existed between Alan Turing, 40 year old computer genius and professor of mathematics, and his 19 year old sex partner – a mere labourer. This is the other, related, feminist justification for the age of consent, and it does not shine a favourable moral light upon Turing’s relationship with the boy".

While 'quicker' is not the word I'd use, we do know that girls' brains starts maturing earlier than boys'.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/sci...mature-quicker-than-boys-scientists-find.html

Do you think this justifies different ages of consent?
Girl's brains start maturing at the age of 10. Is the correct age the one which the brain is completely mature or the one which it starts the process? Does the former even exist?

I made the same questions on a brazillian board, and one of the readers think this justifies the conservative negative view on homossexuality. Roughly translating:

"Think of it, a straight man and a gay man are attracted to teenagers around the age of 15-19. While the straight man is in fact attracted to mentally and sexually mature individuals, the same cannot be said about the gay man. Since it is natural for straights and gays to be attracted to teenagers around this age, this shows that homosexuality is somehow negative".

What are your thoughts on the matter? Please let me know.

 

[repoman]

I think the higher age of consent for homosexuality may have been for getting young men and women past the impressionable years without getting "turned out", I would bet according to the theory of the time.

That old theory maybe was based on Skinnerian concepts - operant conditioning. While that may be a part of it for some people, in utero hormones, genetic and epigenetics probably play a much bigger part.

Being gay has gone from being 100% nurture to 100% nature. Probably about 5-10% too far, especially for women who seem more flexible with sex partners.

 

[Dekusta]

I don't think there is current evidence to support either nature or nurture, but I don't see how that matters to deciding the age of consent.
I mean, I'm no biology expert, but it seems coherent that if boys' brains take longer to mature, the age of consent should be different. Unless, of course, "maturing" means something else than the neurological sense presented in the link above.

 

[credoconsolans]

Emotional and mental maturity - which is what the age of consent is concerned with - the ability of the person involved to deal emotionally with being sexually active and the ability to reason and consider the consequences of the act - is hard to measure, surely?

Everyone knows people in their mid-20s to mid-50s who still have the emotional maturity of a teenager.

Dekusta

The Brazilian person who responded to you while he was correct in that both gay men and straight men are attracted to teenagers, but he seemed to think only straight men were also attracted to mature adults. He seemed to be unfamiliar with young gay men who like mature daddy figures and the fact that many mature gay couples are still together. He seemed to be trying to pigeonhole gay and straight men. Many if not most adult and mature straight men are still attracted to young women. That never changes. But most do not act on their desires.

And of course, all of that ignores lesbians and their desires which are not similar to mens.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I think the higher age of consent for homosexuality may have been for getting young men and women past the impressionable years without getting "turned out", I would bet according to the theory of the time.

That old theory maybe was based on Skinnerian concepts - operant conditioning. While that may be a part of it for some people, in utero hormones, genetic and epigenetics probably play a much bigger part.

Being gay has gone from being 100% nurture to 100% nature. Probably about 5-10% too far, especially for women who seem more flexible with sex partners.

Yeah, that's the basis for it as far as I understand. I think there is a small amount to be said for it--it probably shows a few bisexuals that they are bi rather than purely homosexual. I don't think that's an adequate justification for it, though.

 

[Dekusta]

Emotional and mental maturity - which is what the age of consent is concerned with - the ability of the person involved to deal emotionally with being sexually active and the ability to reason and consider the consequences of the act - is hard to measure, surely?

Everyone knows people in their mid-20s to mid-50s who still have the emotional maturity of a teenager.

Dekusta

The Brazilian person who responded to you while he was correct in that both gay men and straight men are attracted to teenagers, but he seemed to think only straight men were also attracted to mature adults. He seemed to be unfamiliar with young gay men who like mature daddy figures and the fact that many mature gay couples are still together. He seemed to be trying to pigeonhole gay and straight men. Many if not most adult and mature straight men are still attracted to young women. That never changes. But most do not act on their desires.

And of course, all of that ignores lesbians and their desires which are not similar to mens.

I thought that too. It seems current evidence shows that girls' brains begin reorganizing info and focusing on what it thinks to be important around the age of 10 while boys' brains at the age of 15-20. But I don't see how this neurological fact support his conclusion that therefore girls, borrowing your words, can deal emotionally with being sexually active and develop the ability to reason and consider the consequences of their actions sooner than boys. Sounds like an enourmous leap.

 

[Bar-Jesus]

Age of 15 should be about right for both men, women, straight or gay , whatever.

 

[ronburgundy]

It is rather obvious that support for higher age for homosexual sex has zero to do with acknowledging a later development for males. Their emotional and intellectual maturity is also later, so any acknowledgement would mean they should have later ages for things like driving, voting, alcohol consumption, etc..

Thus, the different age of consent has clearly been nothing but an act of anti-gay discrimination. It cannot even be justified under the presumption that homosexuality is "nurture". If anything, that assumption implies that if a person has consensual gay sex, then they are not merely reacting to biological impulses prior to maturity, but have matured enough to decide who they are having sex with. IOW, a 16 year old boy engaged in sex is less likely to have had his immaturity "preyed" upon by a gay man than a straight women. Only under the assumption that gay men are especially immoral and likely to prey upon minors, does the higher consent make sense, or under the assumption that gay sex itself is evil and thus having it too young is far worse than having straight sex when too young.
It likely that both of these homophobic, religious-based notions are behind any push for high consent for gay sex.

 

[repoman]

If you honestly thought that being gay was something that could easily be trained into (0% nature - 100% nurture), I think that it is the moral decision to protect young people from it. Less chance of being happy in a marriage that would produce children is one major point.

Of course the theory is about as wrong as it can be - but I will NOT concede that being gay is 100% nature.

 

[repoman]

This guy really though that 2/3's of the boys playing around with each other sexually would be straight...

No wonder he was such a dick...

 

[repoman]

Boys Beware:

 

[repoman]

Had to search for this clip.

 

[Bar-Jesus]

if anything, the law should have been the other way around, I mean just how exactly can a man get pregnant by playing with another man's dick?

 

[ronburgundy]

If you honestly thought that being gay was something that could easily be trained into (0% nature - 100% nurture), I think that it is the moral decision to protect young people from it. Less chance of being happy in a marriage that would produce children is one major point.

Except the primary source of lesser happiness for gays is the very bigotry that underlies such discriminatory laws. Without such bigotry, and thus equal access to marriage and adopting kids, not much of a case could be made that that homosexuality would be an undesirable "choice". Its more likely an act a combination of anti-gay bigotry and selfishness on the part of parents who for their own interests do not want gay children (e.g., want biological grandkids). I'm not buying that the double standard arose out of sincere moral concern for others.

Of course the theory is about as wrong as it can be - but I will NOT concede that being gay is 100% nature.

I agree with your prior comment that the "nurture" / "choice" factor is stronger for women. There is evidence for this, from both twin studies showing only half the size of a heritability factor for women.
, and from studies on self-reported onset of homosexual feelings and subjective sense of "choosing" same sex over opposite sex partners.
This also make theoretical sense from all models of decision-making, given that greater social, emotional, and economic costs to men for "choosing" homosexuality (in part because of general sexist attitudes that anything feminine is lesser).

 

[ronburgundy]

if anything, the law should have been the other way around, I mean just how exactly can a man get pregnant by playing with another man's dick?

Good point. Yet another piece of evidence supporting thatthe policy is not rooted in sincere moral concern for kids, but in selfish concerns of parents and anti-gay bigotry. The fact is that until recently, most parents would have rather their kids life be severely damaged with an unwanted teen pregnancy, then their kid have even a single gay experience. That is the kind of twisted inhumanity even towards one's kin that religion breeds.

 

[repoman]

According to the logic back then, what they wanted to prevent was kids realizing that gay sex could be a decent sexual release and therefore take away the need for them having to choose to only have straight sex. Am I wrong?

Isn't that the same thing that can be said for the increasingly strong and available porn? Except that this may actually have some truth to it. It you only had 1950s era strength porn would that lead to more or less real life sex?

 

[ronburgundy]

According to the logic back then, what they wanted to prevent was kids realizing that gay sex could be a decent sexual release and therefore take away the need for them having to choose to only have straight sex. Am I wrong?

IOW, they wanted to prevent people from having anything but straight sex, because of anti-gay bigotry. The same people who pushed for higher age of consent pushed for making gay sex in general a criminal act.

 

[Bronzeage]

Emotional and mental maturity - which is what the age of consent is concerned with - the ability of the person involved to deal emotionally with being sexually active and the ability to reason and consider the consequences of the act - is hard to measure, surely?

Everyone knows people in their mid-20s to mid-50s who still have the emotional maturity of a teenager.

Dekusta

The Brazilian person who responded to you while he was correct in that both gay men and straight men are attracted to teenagers, but he seemed to think only straight men were also attracted to mature adults. He seemed to be unfamiliar with young gay men who like mature daddy figures and the fact that many mature gay couples are still together. He seemed to be trying to pigeonhole gay and straight men. Many if not most adult and mature straight men are still attracted to young women. That never changes. But most do not act on their desires.

And of course, all of that ignores lesbians and their desires which are not similar to mens.

I thought that too. It seems current evidence shows that girls' brains begin reorganizing info and focusing on what it thinks to be important around the age of 10 while boys' brains at the age of 15-20. But I don't see how this neurological fact support his conclusion that therefore girls, borrowing your words, can deal emotionally with being sexually active and develop the ability to reason and consider the consequences of their actions sooner than boys. Sounds like an enourmous leap.

I've never bought into the "girls mature earlier than boys" dogma, based on little more than my observations of both. Girls are more docile under authority at nearly every age, and this directs them to make acceptable decisions, thus conformity passes for maturity.

In our society, adolescence is preparation for adulthood. Boys are facing a much different adulthood than girls. It's not surprising to find differences in their behavior, but this does not mean they operating on different levels, when they are actually on different paths.

Back to the original topic:
The age of consent laws were originally made to prevent arranged marriages involving children. Such a thing was usually done to insure an inheritance, or sometimes for more sinister reasons. In any case, the child bride(very rarely a groom) was never in control of her destiny.

In later times, when the reality of premarital sex was recognised, age of consent laws were directed toward the men who seduced(for lack of a better word) young women and abandoned them. It seems a young woman's marriage prospects were greatly reduced if she were a fallen woman, or worse, an unwed mother.

These things were always dependent on the social prejudices and perceptions of the day. Many southern states had different ages of consent for young men and young women. There was once a younger age for black women.

With this in mind, it's not hard to imagine why there would be a higher age of consent for homosexual relationships, as older men were seen as likely to prey on younger men.

 

[ronburgundy]

I thought that too. It seems current evidence shows that girls' brains begin reorganizing info and focusing on what it thinks to be important around the age of 10 while boys' brains at the age of 15-20. But I don't see how this neurological fact support his conclusion that therefore girls, borrowing your words, can deal emotionally with being sexually active and develop the ability to reason and consider the consequences of their actions sooner than boys. Sounds like an enourmous leap.

I've never bought into the "girls mature earlier than boys" dogma, based on little more than my observations of both. Girls are more docile under authority at nearly every age, and this directs them to make acceptable decisions, thus conformity passes for maturity.

In our society, adolescence is preparation for adulthood. Boys are facing a much different adulthood than girls. It's not surprising to find differences in their behavior, but this does not mean they operating on different levels, when they are actually on different paths.
.

Its not dogma, its biological reality. Girls enter puberty an average of 2 years before boys, with 50% of US girls starting breast development before age 10 and menstruation by age 12. Few boys show signs of puberty before age 12, with the average age being 14. Note that breast development occurs 1-2 years earlier now than it did when you grew up, possibly due to nutritional and obesity differences.
Keep in mind that the same hormones that trigger body changes, change the brain too.

Female brains develop more rapidly during adolescence.
[P]"Using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) we found robust male/female differences in the shapes of trajectories with total cerebral volume peaking at age 10.5 in females
and 14.5 in males. White matter increases throughout this 24-year period with males having a steeper rate of increase during adolescence. Both cortical and subcortical gray matter trajectories follow an inverted U shaped path with peak sizes 1 to 2 years earlier in females.

...
Brain development (growth in total cerebral volume) complete at an average age of 22 in females and 30 in males. " [/P]

And a ton of research shows this brain development corresponds with development in emotional control, reasoning, impulsive behavior, and risk taking.

It might be pragmatically or politically too difficult, but scientifically supported argument could be made for granting girls rights and responsibilities ( supervising younger kids, driving, sex, voting, drinking) at earlier ages than boys. That isn't the basis for anti-gay consent laws, but gender differences in maturity development are very real.

 

[repoman]

This is some funny stuff: