This view has been echoed by many people on social media, with some commentators floating ideas such as restricting those under 18 to sleeping with those under 21.
This is not unreasonable.
The only 'age gaps' that this prohibits is when one is 16 or 17, and I'm perfectly fine with such a prohibition.
There is already a problem where girls develop quicker than boys during puberty. It wasn't unknown prior to mandatory ID checks on the doors of nightclubs for underage girls to get in to drink because they looked old enough. It works the other way too, many a time I see young women ask for a child ticket on the buses because the drivers don't ID them.
Are men and dating sites going to ask women for photo ID (which would have to apply to men too) with an increase in the age of consent to protect their backsides?
Of course you are. You think all women are angels, so no women would take advantage of such legislation to manipulate and harm men. And yes, women. Because such laws are always only applied to men and never to women, such is the sexism prevalent in society that you seem to fully support.
I have mixed feelings on this. I just looked it up, age of majority is 18, while age of consent is 16. So, the 16/17 year olds you mention are still minors, and that's a group where I don't mind additional (reasonable) restrictions being placed upon. So in theory this is fine. In practice...perhaps also fine, but slippery slope is a concern, as are some other things I'll mention later.
I'm coming at it mostly from a US perspective, though, and we still technically have some rights, so the situation is a little different. But my main slippery slope concern is that age of consent and majority are linked in a lot of people's minds, so this could, down the road, be used to take legal adults' rights.
But the real issue, as others have mentioned, is that this will generally not be enforced equally, and I'm against all laws that have that issue. People lie, and a 21 year old could accidentally sleep with a 17 year old. Interestingly, that's the same age gap as a 20 year old sleeping with a 16 year old, which would be legal. Odd. Anyway, if the 21 year old is a man, he's fucked (pardon the pun.) If the sexes were reversed, generally I'd imagine it wouldn't be enforced.
Laws like this might seem good on paper (in fact I'm inclined to agree it looks good on paper), but are often used to further destroy relationships and erode trust. This is another "men should be scared of women" law in practice, once again wrapped up in the 'think of the children' guise.
This is not unreasonable.
The only 'age gaps' that this prohibits is when one is 16 or 17, and I'm perfectly fine with such a prohibition.
Unfortunately, people lie.
Say you're 23, hooking up with a 22-year-old.
Psych! She's 20, you're now a rapist! Have fun with that!
There is already a problem where girls develop quicker than boys during puberty. It wasn't unknown prior to mandatory ID checks on the doors of nightclubs for underage girls to get in to drink because they looked old enough. It works the other way too, many a time I see young women ask for a child ticket on the buses because the drivers don't ID them.
Are men and dating sites going to ask women for photo ID (which would have to apply to men too) with an increase in the age of consent to protect their backsides?
I think you misunderstand what I quoted. That would be legal.
The only thing that is not allowed is sleeping with someone under 18 while you being over 21.
Of course, 'lying' would still be a problem then as it is now, and would be under any conceivable system unless you directly address it.
Of course you are. You think all women are angels, so no women would take advantage of such legislation to manipulate and harm men. And yes, women. Because such laws are always only applied to men and never to women, such is the sexism prevalent in society that you seem to fully support.
Does this schizobabble have anything at all to do with what you were replying to?
Oh no! Pointing out that AoV is a feminist who thinks women are angels is "shizobabble". I feel so stupid!
Except that I'm not a feminist and I don't think women are "angels". That's just your retardation and autism speaking.
I have mixed feelings on this. I just looked it up, age of majority is 18, while age of consent is 16. So, the 16/17 year olds you mention are still minors, and that's a group where I don't mind additional (reasonable) restrictions being placed upon. So in theory this is fine. In practice...perhaps also fine, but slippery slope is a concern, as are some other things I'll mention later.
I'm coming at it mostly from a US perspective, though, and we still technically have some rights, so the situation is a little different. But my main slippery slope concern is that age of consent and majority are linked in a lot of people's minds, so this could, down the road, be used to take legal adults' rights.
But the real issue, as others have mentioned, is that this will generally not be enforced equally, and I'm against all laws that have that issue. People lie, and a 21 year old could accidentally sleep with a 17 year old. Interestingly, that's the same age gap as a 20 year old sleeping with a 16 year old, which would be legal. Odd. Anyway, if the 21 year old is a man, he's fucked (pardon the pun.) If the sexes were reversed, generally I'd imagine it wouldn't be enforced.
Laws like this might seem good on paper (in fact I'm inclined to agree it looks good on paper), but are often used to further destroy relationships and erode trust. This is another "men should be scared of women" law in practice, once again wrapped up in the 'think of the children' guise.