Underage Sex, Homo Sapiens and the Net

Hey people.

I have a general question/set of thoughts for the people who use here, hopefully to stimulate a discussion where an outcome is agreeable by all who join in. What im looking for is reactions from a human point of view. Not american/uk/pick a country. Forget your nationality and consider Humans as a species.

Firstly.. have a shufti at AGE OF CONSENT and see what you make of this. Some of these ages may well invoke disgust, and some suprise.

Ok theres some serious variants there. Lets throw some of these about. For all you americans on here, your free to have sex in North Carolina aged 16, but in North Dakota and Tennesse you have to wait til your 18!

In China the age is 14, Spain 13, Chile 12, Uk 16 (although there is no age for males, just that the lass is 16+) ad France 15. So.... in theory, it is possible for a couple from Spain who have been in a loving relationship for 4 years, to move to the USA, pick the wrong state, and get thrown in jail for it!

Now.... enter the Internet! Multinational chats where people interact globally. Instant attraction for preditors on kids. Anonimity up to the point where its too late. Suddenly the laws catch up.... or do they? In the uk where i live, a few people have now been caught and prosecuted for using the net as a place to "Groom" kids, for the sole perpose of underage sex / paedophilic acts. Sickening, but an unfortunate reality.

But, now we have a problem. What if a Spanish/Chinese girl/boy of 14, perfectly legal in their home countries to have sex, decide to chat up and seduce a 17 year old from North Carolina via the net. The 17 year old would then become liable were they to meet up and have sex in the states, even though both of their respective cultures say they are old enough to do so!

I use those countries to portray extreems to show how different cultures have differing views. From my own point of view what i see here happening is a massive breach of civil/human rights from country to country to country.

We, as a race, are human beings, seperated into differing territories. Our rights as individuals on something such as procreation should surely be universal. As the internet tears down borders and boundries massive floors appear in the way different places deal with such issues. If there is to be a law governing such things then surely it HAS to be universal on the grounds that this isnt a cultural issue. Its an issue about us as a species.

I've posed this as a discussion point on a couple of forums and generally all i get back is, "X age isnt right", or "Y age is disgraceful", or "I think it should be age Z"! Thats missing the point completely. Its not about the age. Its about us as a species and a constant that reflects it. The actual age would be irrelevent. Each of us has an age we think is right, based on our upbringing. Americans are regularly appalled at the idea of the age being 15/14, yet they as a civilisation havn't been around nearly as long as the many countries which have ages lower than this, and like China, have a far larger population which accept it as being the norm.

So.. im curious.. what are your thoughts? I put forward the idea that internet chat sites are addictive, (in the same way that gambling/ slot machines are) and as such should be governed by laws which cover such things. I did a survey and 99% of people said that they thought chats were addictive, especially for younger people. In the uk u cannot gamble til age 18 on things like slot machines (not sure about actually placing a bet in a bookies). Were this kind of restriction placed on internet chats this would in theory remove the appeal for preditors, as the target no longer resides in that environment. Im not saying stop kids using the net, but for laws governing chatrooms i'm offering a solution which in turn kills two birds with one stone. Its far from ideal.

Again.. 18 is an example of an age, not a suggestion of a universal age.

Thanks for reading and i await with interest the replies

Alistair

 

Te largest problem I foresee in governing any internet activity is enforcement. How do you know that it's the child getting on the chat room or the adult, all the records will show is an IP address. Add to the problem that you will likely never get an international governing body in place. Countries have a hard enough time just keeping the peace, let alone cooperating on a grand scale to govern the internet with a single set of rules.
In theory I agree, it would be great to limit the activities of minors on the internet, but that's the parent's job, as human beings raising a child it's their responsibility to know what content is appropriate and to take the steps needed to limit it's impact. I honestly believe that saying your child has an internet addiction is a total cop out. Be a parent, go and unplug the computer, you have final say, not your spoilt children.
You're always going to have internet predators as long as you have 13-17 year old children that are allowed to do as they please, with little or no parental supervision involved.
Technology and the ability to comunicate globally have certainly changed how we communicate, and has opened up new avenues for people to commit crimes in the world. The fact is that the final responsibility for what children do resides with their parents. Monitor what chat rooms they're going to ad the problem would be largely avoided.

 

After 9/11 here in the US, there was talk of an ID card for all……..from birth till death, but, who would pay for such a idem……..now your asking, of the internet…..who’s going to pay for it………

……these days, three hundred American dollars gets you a wireless notebook, …now, how ya going to keep the kids safe…………it might be a pipe dream, but, it’s not workable…….wobbles

 

I'm in accord with Fw190. It's up to the parents to police the activities of the children and to make sure they are safe.

 

Then we run into the issue of which age is considerd ok to be unsupervised. If they can do it for real @ 13 in spain, then how can it be right to deny access to such things in a virtual world. Tis a weird dilemma.

 

Age of consent does indeed vary widely around the world. For good reason. Age of consent also usually equals the age at which one can get married. Sex, and child rearing (which follows, no matter HOW much we consider sex to be recreational) are considered by most cultures to be equivelant to and RELATED to marriage, to take care of those babies.

A formal legal "age of consent" is a fairly recent historical concept. In most older cultures, parents had direct say in that consent, and kids married when their parents thought they were ready and had found (or the parents found for them) a good match. So the primary question is not when are they old enough to have sex, but when are they old enough to be self-supporting and make it in the world.

And THAT question depends a lot on the complexity of the culture. In simple agrarian cultures, you don't need very much training to survive on your own. And you could/can always get advice and help from parents/family/community as you went along.

In industrialized complex societies, there is far more to learn before you can be self-sufficient, and you can't learn it all by age 13/14. So you're not ready to be self-sufficient early, which means you can't support a family early, which means it's unhealthy for society for kids that young to be playing around and getting knocked up and becoming a liability and a drain on society, not an asset to it. Which means the age of consent is usually higher. And in our modern ever-moving society, the tight supportive sense of community where everybody helps everybody is mostly gone, so youngsters starting out on their own don't have the support that older simpler cultures offered them.

If you look at that chart, notice that most of the countries that still have very low ages are the less industrialized countries that still have a lot of peasant farmers. Even there, in their larger cities that are more industrialized, many of them socially try to enforce higher ages while the kids are learning. Some industrialized countries still do have fairly low ages that are old historical traditions that haven't yet been formally updated to more modern realities. In your chart, Japan is now listed as 16/18 years old, but I remember not all that many years ago, it was legally 12. In general, as a country becomes more industrialized and more complicated, their age of consent has gone UP to reflect the new realities.

Here in the U.S., each state determines their own, and generally go somewhere between 16 & 18... today.... but when I was 19 & going to college in Tennessee, it was still allowed to marry at 13 with parents' permission. Tennessee still had a lot of rural simple areas and that reflected old traditions back then, that really no longer apply to society here today.

It's frustrating today that people's bodies are ready for mating long before they're socially trained to be able to handle it, but that's a fact of life that we have to deal with.

So no, there neither can nor should be a universal world-wide age of consent. We may be biologically pretty much the same, but cultural and societal demands are too radically different to set one standard for everybody.

It's fairly important to note that there are generally two groups advocating free sex at younger ages. Horny kids that simply want to get laid, and older perverts that want access to younger kids, no matter how politely they state their arguments. (I should probably add a third group. Innocent people that either don't understand the ramifications or haven't given it much thought.) This is NOT a good trend for society, since sex is a lot more than just recreation.

 

To have sex requires the physical realm. So I don't see "virtual" anything as being part of the issue at hand.

 

It's primarily an issue because of predators that use chat rooms to set up meetings in the real world.

 

GT... exactly!

The virtual world is a link to the real one. A catalyst/tool. And therein is the crux of the problem. Its a global tool. Ergo, cultures clash, overlap, and at times conflict. But, as a race, regarding whats classed as using the net to get sexual contacts, if we dont have a standardised age, how can it be possible to enforce laws.

Looking at the site i posted earlier, age of consent, tis amazing the variant between us all, yet we are all the same. I dont advocate any specific age for sex, but what i do see is that if humans in one part of the world cant do what they CAN in another part of the world.... surely that has to be a civil and individual rights violation by one or the other places? And with the net removing such things as land boundries isnt it time we addressed issuse such as this as a race, not a set of cultures.

 

AS FW said, the area of childhood control/upbringing is on the onus of the parents. Unfortunately, not all parents are good parents. Legally, all one can do is take the children away if the circumstances are very dangerous and can't/won't be fixed, which has it's own problems, that the 'fix' is often worse than the problem.

Basically, it is up to an individual, when residing in a particular country, to follow the laws of that country, or face the consequences.

"Oh, but the internet crosses international boundaries, and therefore culture and laws." Yes, it does, but it is still up to the individuals of whatever country/state/territory you may live to abide by the local laws, and to ensure your children do likewise. No judge will listen to a defence that says "well it is okay for people in the Congo or Mongolia to do it." (Stupid examples, but you get the drift).

As for the internet or chartrooms being "addictive". No, chatrooms and the net aren't addictive, but sometimes people's behaviour is obsessive/compulsive. Obsessive is a habitual thinking about something. Impulsive is a habitual acting on something. Once again, in the case of children, the onus is on the parents.

As has been said, all too often parents are just lazy and irresponsible, and use internet, videogames and other lazy-ass methods to occupy their children, instead of actually eating a bit into their football, or soap opera time, and spending 'quality time' with their children.

 

I meant in the context of having sex in general.

 

Well, not exactly. We are NOT all the same, and one size does not fit all. Most of the people in most of the countries that allow very young sex, and marriage, although that is not pointed out in that chart, do not have access to the internet, do not have anything like the culture you and I live in.

A young boy in rural China will start working in the field with his father/family as soon as he is big enough to physically do anything useful; probably by 5 years old. All day, every day. By 10 years old he's pulling his weight and can do most of what his father does, and fully shares in the responsibility, and the worries, of keeping the family fed and clothed. By 13 or 14 he can do anything his father does. He's been told from day one that life is work and responsibility and he's had responsibility shoved on him as fast as he could handle it. By 14 he is fully capable of making his own way in the world, both physicall and mentally. Similar upbringing for the girls. Sex is a part of life right along with family and work, entails obligations as well as being fun.

Over here, we're pampered and coddled all through our much-longer childhood. "Work" is whining about having to clean up our rooms. "Responsibility" is showing up to a nice clean classroom where we can park our butts on a chair and gripe about being there. Actually doing the assigned work is optional. "Worry" is whether or not we've got the right clothes and shoes, and the latest games and toys. At 14 most kids are not emotionally mature or tough enough to make any serious decisions for themselves. They haven't been TRAINED for it. In fairness, it requires far more learning to survive in our society; a lot more time is needed for training than that peasant in China. So our "childhood" stretches out far longer than in underdeveloped countries. Sex to an American kid is mostly about fun, never about babies or marriage, and never about responsibility. They don't really understand responsibility.

Different cultures REQUIRE different rules. We do not live in a cookie-cutter world, and what works here wouldn't work everywhere, and visa versa. Just looking at age of consent without looking at how and why that works in THOSE cultures is meaningless.

 

I have a lot of "weird" ideas about education as we know it today in the US, and how our school system, along with television, have contributed to the breakdown of the family. Disclaimer: I am not anti-education, nor am I anti-television. I am anti-compulsory schooling the way we know it today, which has only been around for a little over 100 years. I think if parents took more of a teaching role in the lives of their children, starting from day one, spending the time it takes to nurture them, involving them in the things that comprise the adult life, (such as taking them to work with you, if possible, having them help you fix the lawn mower, making a cake together, etc) instead of leaving it up to the schools, our society would be in better shape.. My daughter knew how to crack eggs when she was 21/2. She WANTED to learn, we didn't force her. We involve her in adult things, and use big words, and then explain those words so she can understand. No dumbing down for our children.
These things, together with an instillment of virtue, and a willingness to apologize when we are wrong, for things big and small, and I think our kids would be ready to enter the adult life a heck of a lot earlier than they are now.
Truthfully, the way our society is going, I think most kids aren't ready to get married until they are at least 25. Some never really reach maturity. It's a real shame.

Eric

 

Eclayton : Thats an interesting take on it. I live currently in a house where the kids do nothing which is counted as constructive with regards housework etc, kids being 12 n 17. They will doubtless go to college and then uni and emerge into the real world aged 22/23ish and then discover responsabilities. Neither could properly iron a shirt or operate the washing machine, but both can operate the xbox and playstation with consumate ease!
Kids in the western world are coated in cotten wool, kids in the east just get on with it. You cant play playstation if u have limited electric supply and no tv! lol. I agree with you GT about the emotional maturity, but... on the same score, the variants between states in the USA are not susceptable to that arguement. Why the difference between them?
Im curious as well.... do you think that the age of consent DOES work for other cultures? China has the biggest populas, yet the uk is amazingly high on the chart for teenage pregancies, even tho we legally start well after they do! You know over here they are planning to introduce laws outlawing any sexual contact such as kissing before 16?! If it gets thru u can be put on the sex offenders list! Crazy!
The Spanish seem to have it right. They have a low age but a low teen pregnancy ratio according to a documentry over here. Either their condoms are better, or they just dont bother with it, which seems to the the case. Maybe the education about such things is better there?

 

I'm not an expert on Spain, but I suspect it works better because their culture is not as morally bankrupt as our is. Bad things happen in inverse porportion to the overall level of personal responsibility in a society. Their condoms fail at the same rate ours do.

As I mentioned earlier, a formal legal age of consent is a fairly recent invention, specifically for unmarried people. Where cultural inhibitions WORK, the subject usually doesn't even come up, as it is not a large problem for them. Generally restrictive laws on personal behavior get passed only once the action in question becomes a problem and the culture's moral and social constraints aren't working any longer. A century ago, there were no laws about drug use, no laws about guns, no laws about kids having sex, no laws about littering, no laws about a lot of things that require legal restraint today. A century ago you could generally leave your doors unlocked, let your kids go anywhere and play at any time, and buy opium and cocaine at the corner drug store... over the counter. And people generally had the self-restraint to behave responsibly anyway. We've gained a lot in the last century, but we've lost our moral compass.

 

not to mention that America being America, all the ethnicities being a part of society and thus their respective cultures all contribute to the complexities of American culture.

 

Whatever country, if they are old enough to be engaged in sexual activities they are old enough to educate themselves in the sexual laws of other countries so that they can respect those too.

I'm with Kodo on this one...it's a parental responsibility. I've moderated in chatrooms where parents have come along and flamed mods for not keeping their child from chatting to interested adults of the opposite sex. The kids pretend they are adults...the adults pretend they are kids. Mods aren't detectives, nor are they childminders.

 

lol... i agree about the parents. What im saying is, biologically, we are the same species across the globe, and therefore irresspective of emotional developement, surely to impose one rule for one country, and one for another on something which is orientated around us as a species, is ethically and morally incorrect? By default it has to be a breach of human and civil rights as otherwise it is a form of discrimination.
It was mentioned earlier about the emotional developement and how that effects judgements, and feelings of responsibility for our own actions, but i know some very under developed 20+ aged people in that area. Should they not be allowed to have sex, or for someone to have sex with them? Does that also mean after adults have had an alcoholic drink they should be no longer allowed by law to have sex as both judgement and responsiblity for actions becomes impared? They cannot drive a car aftr a pint. I wonder how many kids are concieved due to one or two pints in a nightclub and whisking the lass home for a quicky? lol
Emotionally we are all uniquely developed be it under or over. Im still curious though why loads of "adult chats" on the net are 18 sometimes 21+ when almost every country has laws which state that "kids" can have sex in reality below that age. You can do it, but u cant talk about it. If thats not a repressive society i dont know what is! lol

 

I don't know about morally or ethically incorrect. Those terms are not a part of biology. However, I would say they are biologically moot points. Come down to the facts. Menstruation in females and the Males ability to produce sperm signify the ability to have children biologically. Culture aside, nature is telling us something. Probably due to the rather short life-span of earlier humans. Biologically speaking, sex for the purpose of reproduction is possible by the age of 11 (on average) but the ability to reproduce does not mean we should. Ok, that was sort of tangent but relevant in a way. Look, just because we are the same species doesn't mean that culture doesn't have a role in dictating what is right and what is wrong. It dictates this for reasons, not just "because". Society, 75,000 years ago, was obviously nothing like it currently is and therefore sex to reproduce was probably more likely for the reason of specie propagation and less for recreation.
We now have social restrictions placed on us by what society demands of us. Schooling, work, whatever.. these are times where it is important to follow a certain general path in life in order to succeed so you can have a family. I hope you can see the recursive tie-in there. Aside from that, there are other psychological impacts that sex at an early age can cause, but that's a whole other issue and I know this first hand by some unfortunate event in my life.

 

AliWiseman, you consistently and monolithically focus on the biological capability of sexual intercourse, but ignore all the rest of human biology/psychology, and environment, both of which play huge roles in permission/repression (as you put it) with children.

Some animals are capable of independence right from birth strictly from hard-wired instinct. Many require parental care until they get old enough to function and survive on their own... including most mammals.

Man is born with virtually NO instincts except the instinct to swallow and cry. Kids must be taught everything necessary for survival (much less success). In a simple culture with not too much to learn, that can be accomplished much more quickly than in a very complex society like ours. Is it "repressive" to keep a young kid from walking into a campfire, or walking off a cliff? Is it any more or less repressive to restrict sexual activity until they've reached an age where they can handle it? If you want a good look at total freedom, go read "Lord Of The Flies".

 

Gt no.. im not focusing on the biological thing at all. Your missing the concept that im putting across.

Human rights and civil liberties are nothing to do with biology. Nor am i focusing on children. Its the ideology which i am focusing on. The age is irrelevent, its the consistancy which is the important issue. The idea of looking at us as a species.

In fact i have never once mentioned the physical capacity to have sex as that has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion im attempting to generate. Especially with the linkage to cyberspace, infact its the exact opposite.

Neither am i interested in what amounts to consent... **** is **** irrespective of age.

Quote GT "Is it "repressive" to keep a young kid from walking into a campfire, or walking off a cliff? Is it any more or less repressive to restrict sexual activity until they've reached an age where they can handle it?"

Again... your missing the point. Of course it isnt repressive to instill these things into kids. I've not said otherwise. What i have said is more along the lines of how do we define one 16year old as a kid... another as being an adult, and their activities controlled accordingly. Im well aware of Goldings Lord of the flys, but the world at the moment is more Orwellian, with all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

From a moral point of view i have a 17 year old lad here who in my judgement is far from old enough to raise a child, but i've known many who have done, and done so successfully, and the law states that that is fine. So.... the law here is in my point of view, ineffectual in his case.

We start off in live with the ability and capacity to learn, and as we get older our environnment is what makes us who we become. As we grow older we loose the ability to learn new languages like we can when small. To say that where someone is brought up should alter their human rights has to be wrong. Look at the classification. "Human Rights". It doesnt say (subject to upbringing) in brackets after it. Without consistancy world wide, it becomes farcical, and with the introduction of the net as a global boundry removing tool it is highlighted as such.

 

We have different world views I guess. The U.N. is always having commissions and hearing pushing for universal standards on a lot of things, but I don't see globally consistent standards as applicable in a lot of areas, simply because there is too much variance and too many differences to make everything consistent worldwide. The internet does indeed bring a lot more of us in contact with each other, and makes it more visibly apparent that we have differences, but it doesn't make our lifestyles or our needs consistently the same. "Fair" or "Right" or even "what works" has no universal applicability to a lot of things. And there is no global agreement on this. Heck, there's no absolute LOCAL agreement on it in most places. And as you and others have noted, individual differences make picking a single "right" age all but meaningless, as there are teens that do quite well with it, and "adults" that should be permanently neutered. And we haven't touched on all the differing religious values that impact this. Don't expect to see any kind of universal standard any time soon.