Sexism and Men's Issues

I personally find that pretty iffy.

@Saint Deltora

Just get an account on the site (it's free and doesn't need any personal information) and you can propose them yourself.

Okay, I will probably do that tomorrow. I am on phone right now, só...

I don't like it either because I believe the lack of life experience as well as sexual & emotional maturity can leave these girls vulnerable to emotional abuse, and be taken advantage of in general. It's all about power dynamics, you know?

But, what you gonna do? Today's kids can be impulsive when it comes to relationships. Interestingly, its very rare to see this situation reversed. E.i. a 15-year-old boy dating a 20-year-old woman. I think it has to do with old marriage tradition.

edited 1st Mar '15 3:10:44 PM by LogoP

It's not just that. Men are still expected to take lead in romantic relationships and date people younger than them.

When young male teens score with older women, the more common reaction is: "Yeah, you da man!"

When young female teens score with older man, the more common reaction is: "You monster you, how dare you take advantage of her!"

These reactions can be explained by taking into account:

1) That female sexuality is usually perceived as 'exploitable', and, by implication, 'weak'. It also denies the possiblity of agency and will (some young females do want older males, and out of these, some are surprisingly mature about it, more than young males could ever be).

2) That males are often expected to take the lead, while females are expected to be the 'receptionist'.

3) That, while you have older males that can sexually exploit younger people, there are also older males that are also quite respectful of the younger parties and that there are relationships where a couple like this even managed to make a respectable agreement the likes of which no older couple has actually managed to do ('we'll wait until you're ready', sex ed. informal talks, etc.). Ditto for older females, though they tend to get a pass (unless they're teachers, which is an obvious no no). The excess of zeal of American law enforcement aglomerates all cases under the former banner, instead of analyzing it on a case per case basis (possibly because it's not cost effective or something).

edited 1st Mar '15 3:43:37 PM by Quag15

No kidding. I remember one case, it was all over the local news, there was this teacher, in her late 20s she must have been, who slept with her student, 15.

She was fired & sent to prison, of course, but only temporarily. The truly outrageous part, however, is that the kid's father apparently sent this chick flowers, thanking her for "making his son a man".

edited 1st Mar '15 3:52:26 PM by LogoP

Not suprising. Here in Portugal, men used to take their 14-year old boys to the brothels in secrecy, in the times of the dictatorship.

The teacher/student thing should only be used as a reason to fire the teacher if both of them belonged to the same school. If it's within the age of consent, and it's between two people from different places/schools where one happens to work as a teacher and the other is a student, they should not be fired, provided the personal relationship doesn't interfere with work and teaching capabilities. And, of course, that there are no abuses or exploitations of any kind.

This, of course, requires a case per case analysis, which isn't always feasible, in economical or judicial terms.

edited 1st Mar '15 4:01:37 PM by Quag15

I agree with some of this, but worry about the tone you seem to be taking (apologies if I'm reading it wrong). The appropriate response to the double standard is not to act like older men preying on teenage girls is somehow acceptable. The appropriate response is throw older women who prey on teenage boys in prison for the same sentence we'd make a man serve. Like it or not there are very few teenagers who are remotely emotionally equipped to handle a relationship with an adult, and very few adults who would be interested in a dating a teenager are anything other than predatory. Are there exceptions, as you mention? Sure, but there are exceptions to almost any rule, and that's not a reason to legalize something.

That's why I said in the post right above your post just now that the laws of age of consent need to be respected.

Also that other post was more about simply stating the reactions, than necessarily approving or making a personal judgement of them (though I will definitely condemn stuff like the American law enforcement way of dealing with things, and people who exploit others, regardless of gender or age).

I don't know how many exceptions constitute a new law or rule, but one should write a bunch of subpoints in the laws of consent to contemplate all possible cases, from the good ones to the bad ones.

edited 1st Mar '15 4:33:16 PM by Quag15

You didn't actually say that, you realize. That may well be what you meant, but you didn't actually say it, hence the confusion. Anyway, the problem with working exceptions in is that it leaves them open to exploitation. I'd much rather have something simply be illegal and let any possible exceptions come up as a mitigating factor at trial.

Ah ok, I'll make things more clearer next time.

In terms of exceptions, there are possible solutions which can only be exploited if it's too vague or left to one's own devices. The exception I conceived in my mind would involve stuff like psychological and mental evaluations, as well as some intensive and very complete sex ed.

The time encompassing the exception within the context of a relationship would be, say, if a couple started a relationship within 365 days before the younger party reaches the legal age of consent.

For example, sex without strings attached would get a no no and, therefore, no exceptions. In this particular case, you'd have to be legal, and that's that. A serious relationship has always been a more complicated issue.

But I see your point, and how things are a bit fucked up in the US (correct me if you come from a different country).

edited 1st Mar '15 6:55:27 PM by Quag15

I've seen that too. The logic is basically, "Preteen and teenage girls don't have enough experience to understand how shitty I am and will basically fall desperately in love at the drop of a hat, so I don't have to compete with anybody or improve myself." It's Wife Husbandry; the guy either can't find a woman who fits his notions of what a "perfect girl" is or is too self-aware to even try, so he wants to pick up a young girl who's too inexperienced to know better or expect much from him, then mold her into what he wants.

And while I have heard of some people who are quite happily together after meeting young or whatever, they are the weird exceptions to the rule, not a happy norm. I'm thrilled that your mom was 15 and your dad was 18 when they ran away to Texas to get married and are still together. But if anyone 18 or older regardless of gender comes onto my kid, they can back the hell off until he is 18 too.

I'm very wary of extreme age gaps. Even the difference between 16 and 18 can be enormous. Even if they are at the same maturity level, which can only be determined on a case by case basis, that doesn't mean that they have equal communication skills, expectations, and what not.

I've had some people give me crap for wanting to encourage my son to wait until after high school to start having sex, but it's mainly because I want him to have the proper communication skills so that when he does engage in sexual activity, it's in a healthy manner. He can get his heart broken by an inability to understand what the other one is looking for just as easily as he can break someone else's heart.

People always underestimate that even at the tender age of freakin 15, our brains are still growing. Like. A lot.

Even 18.

Heck, if I ever have children I would pity them because I likely would not take them seriously until they were like. 22. They will be like 18, graduating from high school and I will have a package of their favorite snack, a juice box, and a pacifier, just in case.

Generally I think 16/17 is probably a good baseline age of consent because there are a lot of 16/17 year olds that are mature enough to engage in sexual relations, and are likely to do so in an unsafe manner if it's illegal. Age gaps are a lot more important at that age though, a 16/17 year old is usually inexperienced and easily manipulated, so more than a year or two should be unacceptable.

Even if you don't get married or have children, there are other obligations or consequences that people don't think of.

Like you wanna move in with your partner and you're 17 but they're 23? You can legally have sex with them but you can't have a utility account or be on a lease until you're 18. You're at their mercy. If they don't kick you out you really need to hope they don't bail or leave you with all the expenses. If it's not in their name, it's on you solo.

Kiss your credit goodbye.

And let's be real here, teenagers fall hard. "I want to marry this person because our relationship of 4 months is amazing," HARD. They don't always think about the consequences, because they're still at that age where bad things are something that happens to other people.

Well, I'm an exception, then. My relationship is still going just fine, despite starting at teenage years with a 2-3 age gap(the exact differences are a little weird). In fact, this kind of mentality a-la "shut up, sit down, and wait until your arbitrary age number rises up" had been the thing causing the most problems.

It's bullshit. There is no other way to say it. Shielding teenagers from sex at the age when they want it the most is one the most backwards setups imaginable. I've seen all sorts of flimsy excuses to let this prudery pass. "They aren't developed yet". Well, no flying shit, when you're actively preventing such development by telling them to just wait and make no effort to, well, develop. Of course they're going to perceive the matter the same way at any age if there's no progress to be done. Or hell, worse. This is how we have generation after generation of repressed anxiety-ridden people who convince themselves they have no business having sex anyway and just stick to porn(because unless your parenting style is closer to that of ISIS, you can't realistically expect a teenager to never encounter porn). Friday the 13th moralism.

This is the same reason abstinance until marriage doesn't fucking work. Your psyche isn't going to suddenly and magically switch from "sex is bad" to "sex is good". It's not a bloody on-and-off switch. You're going to build up a wall of shame and hoping the teenager tears it down by themselves somehow.

I'm ok lowering consent to 14 but with the caveat that their partner be within a year or two of them. At 16-17 within five years, and at 18 they can sort themselves out. Mostly because I don't think penalising minors for screwing around with other minors helps anyone and the exploitation angle isn't there the same way.

I second this.

Eliminating age of consent laws or dramatically reducing them is a terrible idea that opens children up to be victimized. It should absolutely be illegal for a 30-year-old to sleep with a 14-year-old.

Romeo and Juliet laws, however, are a good way of keeping these laws that are intended to protect children from persecuting them instead.

True.

I would second that with more options for a judge to handle things on a case by case basis instead of having to treat the law as a blanket "no exceptions" situation.

So let me ask you guys this question from a personal experience.

A close friend of mine began a relationship with the future father of her children at 13, and their difference was so great that he already had children older than she was. According to her, she initiated the relationship, and her parents, rather than try to stop her, simply explained what she was getting herself into. Now, in her 50s, she says that she enjoyed the relationship and the two remained close even after their sexual relationship ended (as I said, he did become the father of her children).

It's because of her that I'm conflicted on the facts of this issue. In legal terms, I think it's absolutely right to have laws that protect children about that age from older people who would take advantage of their youth and naivete. But, there's no line between the two except hindsight. I believe my friend when she says that she "chose" that life and that she doesn't regret a thing. But, how many people in an abuse relationship can and will say the same thing?

So yeah, I don't take her anecdote to speak for the entirety of the issue, but she herself believed that society was to blame for stifling sexual awakening.

She was 13 dating a guy with kids older than she was? Man that's fucked up.

It's quite the case. She started the relationship at the age of 13, which is already on the extreme case.

Do you know at what age she had first time sex with him?

edited 2nd Mar '15 1:07:18 PM by Quag15