...between two consenting adults...

[lawtonfogle]

I have heard this phrase a lot around here, and just recently I realized something... why is the adult needed. As long as both parties consent (and since we consider most kids not able to consent, the few we do most people regard as adults in sexual concerns, I'm namely speaking 16/17 year olds) then why is 'adults' needed. Are we trying to reinforce the idea of no children? If so, why (the reinforcing, not the original idea)?

So, if both parties consent, does it matter if they are adults?

 

[wanderingone]

I have heard this phrase a lot around here, and just recently I realized something... why is the adult needed. As long as both parties consent (and since we consider most kids not able to consent, the few we do most people regard as adults in sexual concerns, I'm namely speaking 16/17 year olds) then why is 'adults' needed. Are we trying to reinforce the idea of no children? If so, why (the reinforcing, not the original idea)?

So, if both parties consent, does it matter if they are adults?

I say 2 consenting adults because I mean 2 consenting adults, 2 consenting people is what some people who feel a 30 year old having sex with a 14 year old is okay as long as the 14 year old "consents" would say.

So yes it matters if they're adults because otherwise I have to spend an additional 5 or 6 posts verifying that I do indeed mean adults and not a 40 year old and a 5 year old who said "yes" when their funny uncle asks if they want to play doctor.

 

[lawtonfogle]

I say 2 consenting adults because I mean 2 consenting adults, 2 consenting people is what some people who feel a 30 year old having sex with a 14 year old is okay as long as the 14 year old "consents" would say.

So yes it matters if they're adults because otherwise I have to spend an additional 5 or 6 posts verifying that I do indeed mean adults and not a 40 year old and a 5 year old who said "yes" when their funny uncle asks if they want to play doctor.

In many areas of the world (and all in US), consenting implies being 16+. As such, by saying consenting adults, are you excluding the 16/17 year olds (in the places where they are considered able to give consent)? As such, unless we are in a country where 14 year olds are able to consent (there are quite a few), it would imply you are not speaking for a 14 year old. Just like when I say 'person' I don't specify that I am not talking about a corporation (which is a legal person), instead I assume they understand what I am talking about. But the point is taken, but another problem arises. What if one of your audience comes from a place where 14 (much like our 18) is the age of adulthood? Wouldn't it be better to state 'two consenting X year olds' replacing X with what ever you feel appropriate (usually from 16-19, though a number of people will push it higher or lower).

 

[God-free]

In my opinion, the phrase "consenting adult" is descriptive of someone with emotional and mental maturity as well as knowledge of the possible consequences of his or her actions. Just because both parties consent to something (sex), doesn't mean they have given any thought to what could happen as a result.

At age 16/17, it's usually all about raging hormones and immediate gratification. Far too often, this is followed with enormous regret because they are not prepared to deal with the consequences (disease, a baby, or both).

I wonder how many grandparents are currently raising their grandchildren these days because of an emotionally immature, ill informed choice that their own child has made. I wonder how many emotionally immature, ill informed teens have a sexually transmitted disease and are unaware, untreated, and unknowingly spreading it to others.

~Barbara

 

[Gremlins]

It's probably to do with the 'ZOMG HOMOGAY = KIDDYFIDDLER' junk you get around here.

 

[cantata]

Consent and informed consent are different. I think we use the phrase "consenting adults" to highlight that we mean the latter.

Of course, lots of adults can't give informed consent, and lots of children can, so it's not a particularly useful or accurate way of expressing it.

 

[lawtonfogle]

In my opinion, the phrase "consenting adult" is descriptive of someone with emotional and mental maturity as well as knowledge of the possible consequences of his or her actions. Just because both parties consent to something (sex), doesn't mean they have given any thought to what could happen as a result.

At age 16/17

*College kid here*
I can tell you it doesn't stop at 17. Our campus newspaper actually has a sex issue during valentines (I guess that holiday isn't all about candy and cards...). Next year I'm planning on bringing a copy back to my church. The standard issues are enough to give some of the more fundamentalist ones indigestion, but this issue should be able to guarantee some 80 year old cussing.

, it's usually all about raging hormones and immediate gratification. Far too often, this is followed with enormous regret because they are not prepared to deal with the consequences (disease, a baby, or both).

I wonder how many grandparents are currently raising their grandchildren these days because of an emotionally immature, ill informed choice that their own child has made. I wonder how many emotionally immature, ill informed teens have a sexually transmitted disease and are unaware, untreated, and unknowingly spreading it to others.

~Barbara

I hate to say it, but turning 18 doesn't grant you critical life experience and basic wisdom.

Hate to see the rate of STDs on my campus..., I still remember one kid (by this I mean adult), joking about having got one...

 

[Spherical Time]

It's probably to do with the 'ZOMG HOMOGAY = KIDDYFIDDLER' junk you get around here.

That's certainly the reason that I say that.

 

[God-free]

I hate to say it, but turning 18 doesn't grant you critical life experience and basic wisdom.

Agreed. I've heard that the human brain doesn't complete its development until age 21. But, even a fully developed brain doesn't guarantee a person will use it properly.

Hate to see the rate of STDs on my campus..., I still remember one kid (by this I mean adult), joking about having got one...

I'm just a tad (32 yrs.) older than you. So, I'm a little out-of-touch with the mindset of the younger generation. Do kids (young adults) think STDs are something to laugh about? They do realize how serious this can be... right? I truly believe a lot of the younger generation would benefit greatly if they would heed some of the old-fogyisms that come their way.

~Barbara

 

[lawtonfogle]

Live fast, die young. To many think like that these days.

 

[wanderingone]

In many areas of the world (and all in US), consenting implies being 16+. As such, by saying consenting adults, are you excluding the 16/17 year olds (in the places where they are considered able to give consent)? As such, unless we are in a country where 14 year olds are able to consent (there are quite a few), it would imply you are not speaking for a 14 year old. Just like when I say 'person' I don't specify that I am not talking about a corporation (which is a legal person), instead I assume they understand what I am talking about. But the point is taken, but another problem arises. What if one of your audience comes from a place where 14 (much like our 18) is the age of adulthood? Wouldn't it be better to state 'two consenting X year olds' replacing X with what ever you feel appropriate (usually from 16-19, though a number of people will push it higher or lower).

The age of consent in the US varies from state to state... as do laws regarding when one who over the age of consent can be charged with a legal offense for a sexual act committed with one under the age of consent. (For example: In some states the minor has to be a certain number of years younger than the person who is not a minor for there to be a charge of statutory rape)

We are rarely talking about specific situations here.. I am not going to write up posts that say "2 consenting 40 year olds" that would mean I'm ONLY talking about people who are 40. When I say 2 consenting adults I mean 2 people who are able to consent legally to the act they are engaged in with each other and for whom competency when compared to each other is relatively equal. (meaning when I say 2 consenting adults I am not referring to the adult staff person at a psychiatric hospital who has sex with a patient in the midst of a psychiatric crisis)

If a 16 year old is a legally consenting adult where you are for the purposes of sexual activity with persons who are that age or older then a 16 year old is included in the notion consenting adult.

 

[wanderingone]

I'm just a tad (32 yrs.) older than you. So, I'm a little out-of-touch with the mindset of the younger generation. Do kids (young adults) think STDs are something to laugh about? They do realize how serious this can be... right? I truly believe a lot of the younger generation would benefit greatly if they would heed some of the old-fogyisms that come their way.

~Barbara

I think it largely depends on the group of college /high school kids one is talking to. I find quite a lot of things that kids find embarrassing are turned into jokes when publicly exposed.

They don't realize how serious it can be... for most of them STD's are things that go away with a shot. These kids are young enough that they may know kids their own age who were born with HIV and have no symptoms thanks to all the treatments available.

 

[lawtonfogle]

The age of consent in the US varies from state to state... as do laws regarding when one who over the age of consent can be charged with a legal offense for a sexual act committed with one under the age of consent. (For example: In some states the minor has to be a certain number of years younger than the person who is not a minor for there to be a charge of statutory rape)

We are rarely talking about specific situations here.. I am not going to write up posts that say "2 consenting 40 year olds" that would mean I'm ONLY talking about people who are 40. When I say 2 consenting adults I mean 2 people who are able to consent legally to the act they are engaged in with each other and for whom competency when compared to each other is relatively equal. (meaning when I say 2 consenting adults I am not referring to the adult staff person at a psychiatric hospital who has sex with a patient in the midst of a psychiatric crisis)

If a 16 year old is a legally consenting adult where you are for the purposes of sexual activity with persons who are that age or older then a 16 year old is included in the notion consenting adult.

So your saying by two consenting adults that you are speaking on a basis of the law of where ever the reader is located. I just hope this isn't the standard, or even near to it, view. See, the number one place I see that asked is in discussions of rather something sexual is moral or not. The thing is, most people here base there system of morality off of something besides the law, and often wants the law to reflect their morals and not vice versa. A good example is this, we don't make murder immoral because it is illegal, we make it illegal because it is immoral (or the act of hurting someone is, ect.). In the end, I believe/hope most hold to some undefined standard of when another is able to engage in sex and is thus able to consent, but being that this standard is mostly undefined, they use the law of the land as a crutch. That way, it is only the lack of most people realizing that this crutch is in the end the byproduct of society's (often ill-concluded) morals, and thus they are in essence 'pulling themselves up by their shoelaces'.

Please note I could easily be confusing ethical and moral, so I hope that doesn't cause any problems.

I will say that I do like the claim "competency when compared to each other is relatively equal" as it avoids a major pit hole that many are very unaware of.

And of course, those who base their morals on the legal system, those of you to whom murder is immoral because it is illegal, please ignore this whole dribble of English.

 

[wanderingone]

So your saying by two consenting adults that you are speaking on a basis of the law of where ever the reader is located. I just hope this isn't the standard, or even near to it, view. See, the number one place I see that asked is in discussions of rather something sexual is moral or not. The thing is, most people here base there system of morality off of something besides the law, and often wants the law to reflect their morals and not vice versa. A good example is this, we don't make murder immoral because it is illegal, we make it illegal because it is immoral (or the act of hurting someone is, ect.). In the end, I believe/hope most hold to some undefined standard of when another is able to engage in sex and is thus able to consent, but being that this standard is mostly undefined, they use the law of the land as a crutch. That way, it is only the lack of most people realizing that this crutch is in the end the byproduct of society's (often ill-concluded) morals, and thus they are in essence 'pulling themselves up by their shoelaces'.

Please note I could easily be confusing ethical and moral, so I hope that doesn't cause any problems.

I will say that I do like the claim "competency when compared to each other is relatively equal" as it avoids a major pit hole that many are very unaware of.

And of course, those who base their morals on the legal system, those of you to whom murder is immoral because it is illegal, please ignore this whole dribble of English.

Like anything else when it comes to issues of age there are case by case issues.. but when I say consenting adults I mean adults.. children involved in consensual activities with each other are not included unless the discussion is specifically related to minors.

I think the relationships that minors have are very real, and very meaningful, but I don't consider them generally able to make the same commitment or have the same understanding of how their actions may or may not impact their lives. When I say nobody has any business in the activities of consenting adults I'm not including the 16 year old couple because they are not independent adults. I will (for example) respect my child's privacy to quite an extent but the fact is that until my kid is an adult I get to be legally responsible for his or her behavior. I am responsible morally for guiding them towards adulthood, giving them input on the values I hope they will have, but if something along the way doesn't go quite right I get to be the one paying the bill. (and I mean that in ways both literal and non-literal)

I'm well aware individuals don't magically become mature at 18 or 21. But there's always going to be some age cutoff for things. The law doesn't form my morals - but I take no issue with some sort of legal age of consent to help avoid minors being manipulated sexually and emotionally by older partners. I take more issue with the oddly young age people are able to marry in many states than I do with age of consent laws.

 

[lawtonfogle]

Like anything else when it comes to issues of age there are case by case issues.. but when I say consenting adults I mean adults.. children involved in consensual activities with each other are not included unless the discussion is specifically related to minors.

I think the relationships that minors have are very real, and very meaningful, but I don't consider them generally able to make the same commitment or have the same understanding of how their actions may or may not impact their lives. When I say nobody has any business in the activities of consenting adults I'm not including the 16 year old couple because they are not independent adults. I will (for example) respect my child's privacy to quite an extent but the fact is that until my kid is an adult I get to be legally responsible for his or her behavior. I am responsible morally for guiding them towards adulthood, giving them input on the values I hope they will have, but if something along the way doesn't go quite right I get to be the one paying the bill. (and I mean that in ways both literal and non-literal)

Reason why I argue that those who are not financially independent shouldn't have sex. But people always retort with abortion and that leads to <insert other thread here>.

I'm well aware individuals don't magically become mature at 18 or 21. But there's always going to be some age cutoff for things. The law doesn't form my morals - but I take no issue with some sort of legal age of consent to help avoid minors being manipulated sexually and emotionally by older partners. I take more issue with the oddly young age people are able to marry in many states than I do with age of consent laws.

I will agree that an age cut off is very helpful in protecting people, namely minors. I wish others though would realize that many fall though the cracks of this system and that it isn't perfect. I will not agree that there will always be an age limit, just as I believe in Strong AI, I think there is a better standard, even if it is currently out of our grasp. As such, I first want people to realize that the age limit isn't the best, at best, it is the best of what we currently have.