not only is this an incredibly lazy argument, it is also factually incorrect. the age of consent throughout the eighteenth century was 21--any union of people younger than this age required parental consent. It was not until the mid-victorian age that age of consent for girls was lowered to an average of 14 years old. these stats are for England; other places, other mores. not to pay attention to regional or periodic differences detracts from any narrative point the author is making.
--gof
05/17 |
i don't know about boys, but girls are capable of sex at an earlier age. so the neocons not only raise the "age of consent", they now want to apply it to boys. get real, folks.
--dwp
05/16 |
oh please, quoting ONE case to argue a point is just lazy reasoning, The young man sentenced to jail was guilty of rape. The girl who had sex with was drunk and unable to give consent. Here's an idea: Don't have sex with people unless they are sober enough to know what they're doing! The fact that he was also prosecuted as a child molestor for having consensual sex with a 15 year old is, of course, ridiculous. Even the jury thought so. There is a huge difference though in teens having sex with other teens and a grown man having sex with a teen.
And girls are not "sexually mature" at the age of 10 or 11 (or even a bit older). Sexual maturity is not solely contingant upon being able to reproduce. And really, what we're talking about is girls when we talk about the age of consent because, in general, it is certain men who just can't stand the idea that there are laws to keep them from having sex with young girls and teenagers. These men are pathetic and need to grow up. Being thankful that these laws exist has nothing to do with being sexual uptight. What's sad is that we even need these laws to protect children and teenagers. Adults should only play with other adults.
--SAD
05/16 |
Is anything more laughable than Americans acting schzoid about sexual behavior? Especially in regards to how other people get off.
--RG
05/14 |
Seriously? Is this article questioning the age of consent? Specifically young females ability to judge for themselves when sex is appropriate? Did you really suggest that laws are in place merely to protect white middle class traditions? wtf is this essay. The editing is crap, the thought process is too broad, never a strong opinion or thesis statement, and i think i might be sickened by the notion that young girls, "lolitas", have any real rational judgment in this area-- but i cant tell if that was actually suggested.
--em
05/13 |
I believe it was a Texas State Police raid and not a FBI raid.
--mll
05/11 |
Cyrus was not "half naked" and she was not on the cover.
--MC
05/11 |
I credit Will Doig's editing... the man makes everything he touches shine...
--KenM
05/11 |
This is some of the best writing I have seen on Nerve in some time. A compelling read.
--N
05/10 |
Interesting article. The sexualization of young people bothers me not because I'm uptight, but because young people often cannot process sexual images and attitudes. Becoming sexualized too young warps the mind, I believe, ruins the fun and lightness of youth. I don't think people need to wait until marriage, or that it's wrong for teenagers to have sex; it's just the mass media's sexualization of what are essentially just kids that bothers me. Concepts of innocence and virginity are really damaging, too, though; obsessing over these two things can make people feel like they're used goods once they've had sex, like they've lost something and therefore are not as good. And the existence of and obsession over the hymen has ruined lives, it's horrible. I've see this in my own country, in the community I grew up in...sorry, going off topic!!
--zin
05/10 |
send feedback on "History of Single Life"
back to "History of Single Life" |
